Feed-in Tariff Pricing and Social Burden in Japan: Evaluating International Learning through a Policy Transfer Approach

Yugo Tanaka, Andrew Chapman, Shigeki Sakurai and Tetsuo Tezuka
Additional contact information
Yugo Tanaka: Graduate School of Advanced Integrated Studies in human survivability, Kyoto University, 1 Nakaadachi-cho, Yoshida, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8306, Japan
Andrew Chapman: International Institute for Carbon-Neutral Energy Research, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan
Shigeki Sakurai: Graduate School of Advanced Integrated Studies in human survivability, Kyoto University, 1 Nakaadachi-cho, Yoshida, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8306, Japan
Tetsuo Tezuka: Graduate School of Energy Science, Kyoto University, Yoshida-honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan

Social Sciences, 2017, vol. 6, issue 4, 1-16

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.

Keywords: energy policy; feed-in tariff; policy transfer; social burden; international learning (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: A B N P Y80 Z00 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (10)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/6/4/127/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/6/4/127/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:6:y:2017:i:4:p:127-:d:115820

Access Statistics for this article

Social Sciences is currently edited by Ms. Yvonne Chu

More articles in Social Sciences from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().