262 Jenny Lieu et al.
applicable good practice lessons from the past regarding scaling up these
options; a supportive current national and international policy framework;
and a deep understanding of national, regional, sectoral, and local contexts,
including the priorities and responsibilities of stakeholders. Pathways for reducing emissions can impact other areas and aspects of society (consequential
risks). Pathway implementation can also be hampered by political, market, or
other types of system barriers (implementation risks). Narratives in this book
describe the diversity of pathways and identify risks for each, and uncertainties where possible.
Including stakeholders in risk assessment is important as they, from their
practitioners’ perspective, are an important source of information for identifying
risks associated with low- carbon transition pathways. While these risks are
context- specific and reflect a broad range of stakeholder perspectives, common
risks are found across the case studies, regardless of the local context, the technology promoted, and the policy mix implemented.
There are three nested dimensions present in all pathways which help both
to explain the source of a risk and identify solutions to address these: technological innovations, policy mixes, and society. Each pathway is rooted in one or more
technological innovation that often face cost barriers compared to existing technologies, as they often have not yet reached a stage of commercial applicability.
Low- carbon technologies are promoted by policy mixes, including policy instruments to overcome financial barriers through reducing the higher cost risks of
technologies. However, policy implementation in itself can be hampered by
risks, too, such as insufficient monitoring and enforcement, particularly if coordination is required across different governance levels. Additionally, policies
can be heavily driven by politics, the changes in which can create significant
uncertainties and potentially dismantle existing policy support for low- carbon
technologies.
Technological innovations and the associated policy mixes resonate in the
social dimension, where their impacts are felt and support or opposition determined. Incumbent technologies are highly influenced by path- dependent socioeconomic interests that enable them to exist, even if the technologies themselves
present consequential risks linked to environmental impacts. Societal acceptance
is also a crucial factor for scaling up technologies, especially when located near
communities. Technologies that have a direct interface with end users require
behavioural changes to ensure long- term sustainability of a pathways. The implementation of higher cost technologies can also have unintentional negative
impacts on social justice linked to energy poverty.
Our narratives, drawn from a comprehensive research and engagement
effort and summarised in Table 14.2, help to make explicit the barriers and
negative outcomes that would have otherwise stayed implicit or hidden.
Rather than addressing risks in an ad- hoc manner as they unfold, we can
identify risks early on in the design of a transition pathway in an attempt to
mitigate them before they manifest. The risk categories help us to consider
risks in areas that we otherwise might overlook due to more pressing current
applicable good practice lessons from the past regarding scaling up these
options; a supportive current national and international policy framework;
and a deep understanding of national, regional, sectoral, and local contexts,
including the priorities and responsibilities of stakeholders. Pathways for reducing emissions can impact other areas and aspects of society (consequential
risks). Pathway implementation can also be hampered by political, market, or
other types of system barriers (implementation risks). Narratives in this book
describe the diversity of pathways and identify risks for each, and uncertainties where possible.
Including stakeholders in risk assessment is important as they, from their
practitioners’ perspective, are an important source of information for identifying
risks associated with low- carbon transition pathways. While these risks are
context- specific and reflect a broad range of stakeholder perspectives, common
risks are found across the case studies, regardless of the local context, the technology promoted, and the policy mix implemented.
There are three nested dimensions present in all pathways which help both
to explain the source of a risk and identify solutions to address these: technological innovations, policy mixes, and society. Each pathway is rooted in one or more
technological innovation that often face cost barriers compared to existing technologies, as they often have not yet reached a stage of commercial applicability.
Low- carbon technologies are promoted by policy mixes, including policy instruments to overcome financial barriers through reducing the higher cost risks of
technologies. However, policy implementation in itself can be hampered by
risks, too, such as insufficient monitoring and enforcement, particularly if coordination is required across different governance levels. Additionally, policies
can be heavily driven by politics, the changes in which can create significant
uncertainties and potentially dismantle existing policy support for low- carbon
technologies.
Technological innovations and the associated policy mixes resonate in the
social dimension, where their impacts are felt and support or opposition determined. Incumbent technologies are highly influenced by path- dependent socioeconomic interests that enable them to exist, even if the technologies themselves
present consequential risks linked to environmental impacts. Societal acceptance
is also a crucial factor for scaling up technologies, especially when located near
communities. Technologies that have a direct interface with end users require
behavioural changes to ensure long- term sustainability of a pathways. The implementation of higher cost technologies can also have unintentional negative
impacts on social justice linked to energy poverty.
Our narratives, drawn from a comprehensive research and engagement
effort and summarised in Table 14.2, help to make explicit the barriers and
negative outcomes that would have otherwise stayed implicit or hidden.
Rather than addressing risks in an ad- hoc manner as they unfold, we can
identify risks early on in the design of a transition pathway in an attempt to
mitigate them before they manifest. The risk categories help us to consider
risks in areas that we otherwise might overlook due to more pressing current