Austria 39
steel pathway includes profound switches from coal, coke, or gas to electricity or
hydrogen. This is because steel producers will interact in different value chains
and on different markets with different risk profiles.
An additional consequential risk mentioned relates to increasing market
penetration of electric vehicles. This could discriminate against the domestic/
European automotive industry, which is currently producing cars with conventional combustion engines. Moreover, the net employment effect of such
switches is unclear. For the given case, traditional jobs like mechanics might be
put under pressure while electricians and IT technicians might gain.
Cluster 6: Innovation and technology choice
Risks in the cluster innovation and technology choice comprise consequential and
implementation risks, e.g. the risk of lock- in effects for new technologies and
corresponding path dependency, lack of information infrastructure (smart solutions), the risk of large investments for private households when investing in
decentralised solutions, and the question of timing to finance an investment.
Another implementation risk refers to non- existing co- ordination across
sectors for their technology choices. Furthermore, there is a lack of public financial support for innovation and research, which is especially critical for projects
that are between pilot technology and industrial application (upscaling).
Path dependency and lock- in effects (e.g. through capacity mechanisms) are
consequential risks along the transition pathway. A diversification of risk can be
achieved by initiating different technological options. The risk of timing is one
along the transition pathway but also a kind of implementation risk. For
instance, the right time for installation of hydrogen- based technology to be
competitive is very difficult to predict.
Prioritisation of risks by cluster
The comprehensive number of risks collected through the stakeholder process
has been prioritised in a World Café setting. The scoring procedure has been
done by risk cluster, i.e. the prioritised risks represent the most important risks
for each cluster but cannot be compared across risk categories. They were then
allocated to the implementation and consequential risks category. High- scored
implementation risks are lack of a national strategy and co- ordinated European
policy and the lack of a regulatory framework (thus poor timing of investments).
On a more individual level, the play- off between climate mitigation and social
justice and the role of behavioural change were also highly scored. High- scored
consequential risks from a stakeholder perspective are the stability of grids and
flexibility of the energy system, the possibility of lock- ins, and the fear that
households bear the main part of the costs due to misleading signals from politics or markets. The risk that resources are not considered in transition calculations is seen as the most relevant risk for the environment cluster. (See
Figure 3.2).
steel pathway includes profound switches from coal, coke, or gas to electricity or
hydrogen. This is because steel producers will interact in different value chains
and on different markets with different risk profiles.
An additional consequential risk mentioned relates to increasing market
penetration of electric vehicles. This could discriminate against the domestic/
European automotive industry, which is currently producing cars with conventional combustion engines. Moreover, the net employment effect of such
switches is unclear. For the given case, traditional jobs like mechanics might be
put under pressure while electricians and IT technicians might gain.
Cluster 6: Innovation and technology choice
Risks in the cluster innovation and technology choice comprise consequential and
implementation risks, e.g. the risk of lock- in effects for new technologies and
corresponding path dependency, lack of information infrastructure (smart solutions), the risk of large investments for private households when investing in
decentralised solutions, and the question of timing to finance an investment.
Another implementation risk refers to non- existing co- ordination across
sectors for their technology choices. Furthermore, there is a lack of public financial support for innovation and research, which is especially critical for projects
that are between pilot technology and industrial application (upscaling).
Path dependency and lock- in effects (e.g. through capacity mechanisms) are
consequential risks along the transition pathway. A diversification of risk can be
achieved by initiating different technological options. The risk of timing is one
along the transition pathway but also a kind of implementation risk. For
instance, the right time for installation of hydrogen- based technology to be
competitive is very difficult to predict.
Prioritisation of risks by cluster
The comprehensive number of risks collected through the stakeholder process
has been prioritised in a World Café setting. The scoring procedure has been
done by risk cluster, i.e. the prioritised risks represent the most important risks
for each cluster but cannot be compared across risk categories. They were then
allocated to the implementation and consequential risks category. High- scored
implementation risks are lack of a national strategy and co- ordinated European
policy and the lack of a regulatory framework (thus poor timing of investments).
On a more individual level, the play- off between climate mitigation and social
justice and the role of behavioural change were also highly scored. High- scored
consequential risks from a stakeholder perspective are the stability of grids and
flexibility of the energy system, the possibility of lock- ins, and the fear that
households bear the main part of the costs due to misleading signals from politics or markets. The risk that resources are not considered in transition calculations is seen as the most relevant risk for the environment cluster. (See
Figure 3.2).