Results: Searching for 'Publication held elsewhere'

Current policy debates and energy scenarios for the UK highlight the different possible ways of transforming the energy system in order to meet long-term national policy goals, including those of building a low carbon economy, achieving energy security and affordability, and mitigating environmental impacts. Although there has been much previous research on what publics think about specific ways of producing or consuming energy, we know far less about public perceptions, attitudes and values when elicited in relation to whole energy system change as an interconnected set of transformations in the systems of supply, demand, infrastructure and human behaviour.

Greater understanding of public acceptability of whole energy system change will present both opportunities, and also highlight challenges, for the delivery of UK energy policy and transitions. The research had three empirical phases: interviews with key stakeholders, a series of six in-depth deliberative workshops held with publics in England, Scotland and Wales, and a nationally representative survey (Great Britain, n=2,441). This report represents a synthesis of key findings drawn from the two core datasets relating to public perceptions and preferences i.e. the workshops and the survey.

This final report presents and discusses national survey findings from a collaborative and cross-national research project undertaken by Griffith University (Australia) and Cardiff University (UK) examining public risk perceptions, understandings and responses to the threat and unfolding impacts of climate change in Australia and Great Britain. The Australian national survey was undertaken between 6 June and 6 July, 2010 and involved a representative and geographically and demographically stratified national sample of 3096 respondents. The British survey was undertaken between 6 January and 26 March, 2010 and involved a representative quota sample of 1822 respondents residing in England, Scotland and Wales. These articulated surveys were distinctive in their cross-national comparative collaboration, in their psychological and social science nature, focus, and design, in their indepthnature, and in their focus on underlying public understandings and psychological responses to climate change.

This report addresses common findings from these two linked surveys, and expands discussion of issues and findings from the Australian survey. A report detailing the UK survey findings is available separately (Spence, Venables, Pidgeon, Poortinga, & Demski,2010). As well as shared questions and objectives, each survey had additional and differing objectives, with the Australian survey also examining in more detail public risk perceptions, direct exposure and experience, and psychological responses and impacts to natural disasters. The British survey examined in more detail respondents perceptions of energy policies and futures for the United Kingdom. The Australian survey also differed in that it was specifically designed and planned to establish a data base and research platform for documenting and monitoring climate-related changes and impacts in the human landscape over time, including changes in risk perceptions and understandings, psychological responses, and changes in psychological adaptations and impacts.

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions can be allocated to a country in different ways, territorial-, production- and consumption-based emission reporting. There is a marked difference in end results depending on the chosen system. For example, the UK territorial-based emissions have shown a 19% reduction between 1990-2008. Conversley, consumption-based emissions show a 20% increase during the same period, which is driven by GHG embodied in imported products.

It is possible to develop a robust methodology for measuring GHG emissions on a consumption-based approach. In the past 10-years there have been multiple independent studies published on this subject that display consistent results. The methodology of choice is Environmentally Extended Multi-Region Input-Output (EE-MIRO) Analaysis. Whilst there are uncertainties relating to the large and often incoherent datasets, it is believed that standard error estimates can be used to provide confidence in the results.There is significant expertise in EE-MIRO in the UK.

Consumption-based emission inventories are not a silver-bullet for climate policy. Different emission inventories contain complementary information, and thus, consumption-, production-, and territorial-based emission inventories should be considered together.

That said, consumption-based emission modelling does have speciific advantages, in that:

1. It may reveal policy approaches specific to different products.
2. It enables the possibility of standard carbon accounting for organisations globally.

The main disadvantage to consumption-based emission modelling is that it requires additional accounting and analysis.

It is desirable to adopt emission reduction targets based on consumption, in addition to production, for three reasons:

1. It would incorporate options to address ‘weak carbon leakage’ (carbon embodied in imports).
2. It encourages reduction of emissions at least cost, even if the most cost effective option addresses non-territorial emissions.
3. Consumption-based emissions are increasing and as such are undermining UK domestic climate policy.

UKERC proposes three-steps the UK Government could pursue should they wish to move towards consumption-based emissionreporting:

1. The UK Government, in conjunction with UNFCCC and Eurostat, could establish standards for the harmonisation of consumption-based emission reporting methods to ensure robustness and consistency between country estimates.
2. The UK Government should commission a report to assess all the UK demand-side strategies contributing to emission reduction within and without of the UK.
3. The UK Government could assess the cost-effectiveness of demand-side strategies to understand whether they are revenue generating or a cost.

There is increasing scientific evidence that natural systems are now at a level of stress globally that could have profound negative effects on human societies worldwide. In order to avoid these effects, one, or a number of technological transitions will need to take place through transforming processes of eco-innovation, which have complex political, institutional and cultural, in addition to technological and economic, dimensions. Measurement systems need to be devised that can assess to what extent eco-innovation is taking place. Environmental and eco-innovation have already led in a number of European countries to the establishment of substantial eco-industries, but, because of the general absence of environmental considerations in markets, these industries are very largely the result of environmental public policies, the nature and effectiveness of which have now been assessed through a number of reviews and case studies. The paper concludes that such policies will need to become much more stringent if eco-innovation is to drive an adequately far-reaching technological transition to resolve pressing environmental challenges. Crucial in the political economy of this change will be that eco-industries, supported by public opinion, are able to counter the resistance of established industries which will lose out from the transition, in a reformed global context where international treaties and co-operation prevent the relocation of environmentally destructive industries and encourage their transformation.

This document sets out some of the theoretical concepts underlying the project Mapping rebound effects from sustainable behaviours and reviews some of the previous studies in this area. The aim is to provide a starting point for the empirical research.

Two workshops brought together around 40 experts including policy makers and advisors, scientists, businesses and civil society organisations to provide a neutral forum, under Chatham House rules, for full and frank dialogue to discuss measures for maximising the sustainability marine energy arrays within the UK government target timescales. The first workshop, “Marine Planning for Arrays: Social, economic and environmental issues and implications”, examined the social, economic and environmental impacts and cumulative impacts relating to siting and deployment of arrays and how to integrate the assessment and management of these using a holistic approach that considers the entire marine and coastal system. The second workshop, “Marine spatial planning for the deployment of arrays”, examined the marine planning policy context, simplification of consenting, locational criteria and models under development to aid decision-making.

The aim of the workshop was to bring together academics and practitioners from different disciplines and backgrounds in order to ultimately inform more effective approaches to public communication of, and engagement with, climate change and energy reduction. The overarching question to be addressed by the workshop was, “What can empirical and theoretical studies of communication and behaviour change tell us about how we might move towards a more ‘climate-friendly’ (low-carbon, climate resilient) society?”. More specifically the workshop objectives were to: share cutting-edge research and practice; foster learning across disciplines and contexts; identify gaps in understanding; form new interdisciplinary contacts and networks; consider and generate new insights; stimulate novel collaborations; provide the contents for a book and a workshop report that would be useful for academics, practitioners and policy-makers. Central to the workshop were three sessions relating to the overarching question: models, messages and media. These sessions involved 10 minute presentations from each of three presenters and a 10 minute response from an invited discussant.