Abstract
Feed-in tariff (FiT) policy approaches for renewable energy (RE) deployment are employed in many nations around the world. Although FiTs are considered effective in boosting RE deployment, the issue of increasing energy bills and social burden is an often-reported negative impact of their use. The FiT has been employed in Japan since 2012, following after many developed countries, and, as was experienced in other nations, led to a social burden imparted on society significantly higher than initial government estimates. Although policy decision making does not necessarily reflect international policy experience, it is still prudent to ask how international policy experiences of social burden increase were considered within the Japanese approach. In this research, we analyzed the transfer process by adapting a conventional model to develop more objective observations than was previously possible, by setting a benchmark for evaluation based on prior international experiences. We identified two streams of policy transfer, each led by different actors; the government and representatives of the National Diet of Japan (Diet). Both actors were exposed to the same experiences, however the interpretation, application to policy development and priority settings employed were vastly different. Although the framework can only assess policy learning processes, we have found that the government undertook a reasonable and rational process toward learning, while, on the other hand, the modified bill developed by the Diet members did not thoroughly derive learnings in the same way, due to cognitive and political reasons, and specifically, the issue of limiting social burden was not addressed.
Highlights
The feed in tariff (FiT) policy for renewable energy (RE) was introduced in Japan in 2012
We attempt to answer the following questions from a “policy transfer process” point of view; (1) Why did Japan experience the same increase in social burden as other Feed-in tariff (FiT) nations? (2) Did Japan learn from the negative outcomes experiences in other nations?
This research augmented the lesson-drawing framework, in applying to the Japanese FiT case as an example, in order to assess both the policy transfer process as originally intended by Rose, and in addition deliver a detailed identification of lessons learned internationally, and their specific impact upon policy development and its outcomes in the target nation
Summary
The feed in tariff (FiT) policy for renewable energy (RE) was introduced in Japan in 2012. Following the broad implementation of the FiT, over time, several issues were identified and in many cases around the world adjustments to policy mechanisms were deemed necessary to alleviate these issues It is, prudent to consider what Japan learned from the experience of countries who implemented the FiT before them; that is, what was learned from their experiences, upon which evidence base were Japanese policies built, and why did Japan implement a policy which led to the same increase in social burden as the nations investigated. This research adapts Rose’s lesson-drawing model (detailed in Chapter 2) such that it can be used as a qualitative evaluation framework of international policy learnings, identifying what lessons have been drawn around a specific issue within policy approaches, using other nations’ experience as a benchmark With this framework, we attempt to answer the following questions from a “policy transfer process” point of view; (1) Why did Japan experience the same increase in social burden as other FiT nations? We attempt to answer the following questions from a “policy transfer process” point of view; (1) Why did Japan experience the same increase in social burden as other FiT nations? (2) Did Japan learn from the negative outcomes experiences in other nations?
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.