Strategic Studies of public policy

Strategic Studies of public policy

The role of Technology and Innovation Policy in Simultaneously Addressing the Energy Intensity and Carbon Intensity Imbalance

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
Naser Bagheri Moghaddam 1
mohammad ali ahmady 2
Majid AbbasPour 3
amir nazemi 1
1 PhD in Technology Management, Faculty Member, Technology and Innovation Policy Research Group, Futures Studies Group, National Science Policy Research Center, Tehran, Iran.
2 PhD Student in Futures Studies, Science and Technology Futures Studies Research Group, National Science Policy Research Center, Tehran, Iran.
3 PhD in Environmental Systems Engineering, Faculty Member, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
10.22034/sspp.2024.2035379.3682
Abstract
Today, one of the most important issues facing policymakers is solving the energy and carbon imbalance challenge. After examining the relationship between the challenge of energy and carbon imbalance, this research provides a new definition of the energy and carbon imbalance concept and shows the historical trend of this imbalance and its future scenarios. In this research, using the downscaling method, the scenarios of "Representative Concentration Pathways" and "Shared Socioeconomic Pathways" have been developed from the international level to the national level. The findings of the research, although they show the increase of energy intensity and carbon intensity in Iran during the last decade, the convergence scenarios predict a significant decrease in the carbon intensity index, which play an effective role in solving the challenge of energy imbalance and emission reduction goals. It shows the beginning of the 21st century. The results of the research indicate that solving the country's energy imbalance challenge is one of the issues intertwined with other issues in the energy field, including mitigation and adaptation policies in the field of climate change, and requires a new approach to the concept of imbalance and the pursuit of a comprehensive and coordinated approach.
Keywords
Energy imbalance
climate change
scenario
Kaya

Subjects

References
Absar, S.M. and Preston, B.L., 2015. Extending the shared socioeconomic pathways for sub-national impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability studies. Global Environmental Change, 33, pp.83-96.
Agreement, P. (2015, December). Paris agreement. In report of the conference of the parties to the United Nations framework convention on climate change (21st session, 2015: Paris). Retrived December (Vol. 4, No. 2017, p. 2). Getzville, NY, USA: HeinOnline.
Alcamo, J., Kok, K., Busch, G., & Priess, J. (2008). Chapter four searching for the future of land: scenarios from the local to global scale. Developments in Integrated Environmental Assessment, 2, 67-103.
Azimzadeh Arani, Mohammad and Tahmasbi Blokabad, Reza. (2014). Investigating the Role of the Gas Sector Governance Structure in Solving the Challenge of Imbalance; (Case Study: Selected Countries). Strategic Studies on Public Policy.
Crippa, M., Guizzardi, D., Muntean, M., Schaaf, E., Solazzo, E., Monforti-Ferrario, F., ... & Vignati, E. (2020). Fossil CO2 emissions of all world countries. Luxembourg: European Commission, 1-244
Dosi, G. (1983). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories. Research Policy, 11(3).
Ehrlich, P.R. and Holdren, J.P., 1971. Impact of Population Growth: Complacency concerning this component of man’s predicament is unjustified and counterproductive. Science, 171(3977), pp.1212-1217.
Enkvist, P. A., Dinkel, J., & Lin, C. (2010). Impact of the financial crisis on carbon economics: Version 2.1 of the global greenhouse gas abatement cost curve. McKinsey & Company, 374.
Ernst, A., Biss, K. H., Shamon, H., Schumann, D., & Heinrichs, H. U. (2018). Benefits and challenges of participatory methods in qualitative energy scenario development. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 127, 245-257.
Fagerberg, J. (2018). Mission (im) possible? The role of innovation (and innovation policy) in supporting structural change & sustainability transitions (No. 20180216). Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
Fatemi, M., & Arasti, M. (2019). Priority-setting in science, technology and innovation. Journal of science and technology policy, 12(2), 119-133.
Gassler, H., Polt, W., & Rammer, C. (2008). Priority setting in technology policy: historical developments and recent trends. Innovation policy in Europe. Measurement and strategy, 203-224.
Gielen, D., Boshell, F., Saygin, D., Bazilian, M. D., Wagner, N., & Gorini, R. (2019). The role of renewable energy in the global energy transformation. Energy strategy reviews, 24, 38-50.
Gütschow, J., Jeffery, M.L., Günther, A. and Meinshausen, M., 2021. Country-resolved combined emission and socio-economic pathways based on the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) and Shared Socio-Economic Pathway (SSP) scenarios. Earth System Science Data, 13(3), pp.1005-1040.
Hafezi, Reza and Rahimi Rad, Zohreh. (2014). Social Participation and Its Role in Solving the Challenge of Energy Imbalance. Strategic Studies on Public Policy, 52 (14).
Harper, W. (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. Theological Librarianship, 5(2), 88-89.
Karimi, Mohammad Sadegh, Hafezi, Reza and Sohankar, Amir Hossein. (2000). Redefining Iran’s Energy Diplomacy Policy on Natural Gas in the Horizon 2020, Necessity or Choice?. Strategic Studies on Public Policy, 41 (11), 116-135.
Kaya, Y. (1989). Impact of carbon dioxide emission control on GNP growth: interpretation of proposed scenarios. Intergovernmental panel on climate change/response strategies working group, May.
Kebede, A. S., Nicholls, R. J., Allan, A., Arto, I., Cazcarro, I., Fernandes, J. A., ... & Whitehead, P. W. (2018). Applying the global RCP–SSP–SPA scenario framework at sub-national scale: A multi-scale and participatory scenario approach. Science of the Total Environment, 635, 659-672.
Lang, D. J., Wiek, A., Bergmann, M., Stauffacher, M., Martens, P., Moll, P., ... & Thomas, C. J. (2012). Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustainability science, 7, 25-43.
Lundvall, B. A. (1992). National systems of innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning (Vol. 242). Pinter: London.
Nations, U. (2016). The sustainable development goals 2016. ESocialSciences.
Nelson, R. R. (1959). The simple economics of basic scientific research. Journal of political economy, 67(3), 297-306.
Rogelj, J., Fricko, O., Meinshausen, M., Krey, V., Zilliacus, J. J., & Riahi, K. (2017). Understanding the origin of Paris Agreement emission uncertainties. Nature communications, 8(1), 15748.
Rovinaru, M. D., Bako, D. E., Rovinaru, F. I., Rus, A. V., & Aldea, S. G. (2022). Where are we heading? Tackling the climate change in a globalized world. Sustainability, 15(1), 565.
UNTC. (n.d.-b). https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-d&chapter=27&clang=_en
Vuuren, D.P., Lucas, P.L. and Hilderink, H., 2007. Downscaling drivers of global environmental change: Enabling use of global SRES scenarios at the national and grid levels. Global environmental change, 17(1), pp.114-130.
Yearley, S. (2007). Nature and the environment in science and technology studies. In The handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 921-948). MIT Press.
Yetano Roche, M., Paetz, C. and Dienst, C., 2019. Implementation of nationally determined contributions: Islamic republic of Iran country report.
Strategic Studies of public policy
Volume 14, Issue 52
Examination of solutions to solve the challenge of the country's energy imbalance"
Autumn 2024
Pages 104-126