eprintid: 10043127
rev_number: 31
eprint_status: archive
userid: 608
dir: disk0/10/04/31/27
datestamp: 2018-02-12 15:17:13
lastmod: 2021-11-18 23:14:53
status_changed: 2019-01-25 14:20:37
type: article
metadata_visibility: show
creators_name: Cooper, ACG
title: Evaluating energy efficiency policy: understanding the ‘energy policy epistemology’ may explain the lack of demand for randomised controlled trials
ispublished: pub
divisions: UCL
divisions: B04
divisions: C05
divisions: J39
keywords: Experimental design; Evaluation; External validity; Policy; Energy efficiency; Randomised controlled trials; Epistemology
note: © The Author(s) 2018. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
abstract: Vine et al.’s (2014) call for more randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in government-funded energy efficiency policy evaluation practice raises timely questions about what constitutes effective designs for evaluating and informing energy policy. Their implicit hypothesis that policy organisations share the same epistemic perspective as they do, and that the reason there are few RCTs are due to a set of barriers to be overcome is examined in relation to the UK government Department of Energy and Climate Change. Drawing on the author’s experience of working in the ministry, the claim that barriers are a reason for preventing RCT use is discounted. An alternative explanation is presented, framed around the idea of an ‘energy policy epistemology’ that legitimately places certain specific knowledge demands and ways of knowing on research and evaluation designs. Through examination of a specific set of research and evaluation outputs related to the UK energy efficiency policy called the ‘Green Deal’, aspects of the proposed ‘energy policy epistemology’ are elucidated to explain the lack of demand for RCT designs. Final consideration is given to what kinds of designs are more likely to gain support in this context that might also deliver many of the benefits attributed to RCTs with longitudinal panels being one important example.
date: 2018-04
date_type: published
official_url: http://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-018-9618-8
oa_status: green
full_text_type: pub
language: eng
primo: open
primo_central: open_green
article_type_text: Article in Press
verified: verified_manual
elements_id: 1533200
doi: 10.1007/s12053-018-9618-8
lyricists_name: Cooper, Adam
lyricists_id: ACGCO44
actors_name: Bracey, Alan
actors_id: ABBRA90
actors_role: owner
full_text_status: public
publication: Energy Efficiency
volume: 11
number: 4
pagerange: 997-1008
issn: 1570-6478
citation:        Cooper, ACG;      (2018)    Evaluating energy efficiency policy: understanding the ‘energy policy epistemology’ may explain the lack of demand for randomised controlled trials.                   Energy Efficiency , 11  (4)   pp. 997-1008.    10.1007/s12053-018-9618-8 <https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-018-9618-8>.       Green open access   
 
document_url: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10043127/7/Cooper%20VoR%20Cooper2018_Article_EvaluatingEnergyEfficiencyPoli.pdf