Table 2 Evaluation dimensions and criteria along the technological and governance dimensions
From: Addressing energy poverty through technological and governance innovation
Axis | Dimension | Subdimensions | Subdimension description | SCALE | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | ||||
A. Technological innovativeness | A.1 Technology innovation | A.1.1 Technological means | From a technological product perspective, does the policy involve fighting energy poverty through “usual/classical” technological elements or does it involve the implementation a new technologies? | Technology is not present at all in the policy | Technology is present, but from a classical approach | The technology differs significantly in their characteristics or intended uses from previous technology | ||||
A.1.2 Technological process | From a technological process perspective, does the policy involve fighting energy poverty through “usual/classical” means or does it involve the implementation a new technological process? | Technology is not present at all in the policy | Technology is present, but from a classical approach | The measure includes the adoption of technologically new methods | ||||||
A.2 Replicability and applicability | A.2.1 Applicability | Is the technology easily applicable in local and specific contexts, without great effort? | The new technology implemented need to be applied in a centralised way and it needs an important effort | The applicability of the new technology is not relevant in the policy | The technology is applied in a decentralised way and can be adapted to different contexts | |||||
A.2.2 Replicability | Is the new technology implicated in the measure easily replicable in other contexts and places? | The application of this new technology highly depends on the specific context and its characteristics. It cannot be easily replicated | The replicability of the new technology is not relevant in the policy | The new technology can be easily replicated in other contexts | ||||||
A.3 Renewable and alternative energy sources | A.3.1 Renewable and alternative energy sources | Does the measure make an effort to step up progress toward using renewable-energy technologies? | The policy is based-on classical and non-renewable energy technologies | The measure does not have impact on this issue | The measure make an effort to step up progress toward using renewable-energy technologies | |||||
B. Governance innovativeness | B.1 Mode of Action | B.1.1 Policy adequation | Is the policy tailored to the needs of the beneficiary? | No, the beneficiaries receive the same kind of help regardless of their specifics | There are some loose categories of beneficiaries based on specifics and the intervention is based on the categories | Yes, the measures implemented vary and are properly adapted to the specific features of each beneficiary | ||||
B.1.2 Policy approach | Does the policy emphasize action at the grassroots level (action based on networking and cooperation among individuals) | No, the policy has a full top-down approach, with institutions doing all the work and providing to the citizens | There is a continuous dialogue between representatives (action groups, NGO’s, community leaders)of the citizens and institutions to shape actions | There is a clear focus on grassroots action. The policy cannot be properly implemented without active involvement from the citizens. Institutions only create the context for action at the grassroots level | ||||||
B.1.3 Resources provided | What type of resources are provided by the policy? | The type of resources provided is financial support with short-term objectives | The resources provided are mainly financial, but through innovative forms (such as reducing taxation, revolving funds, etc.) | The type of resources provided are diverse and seek for longer term impacts | ||||||
B.1.4 Funding method | Does the policy incorporate an innovative funding method? | No, the policy relies on a classical method of funding (based on classical public investment without mechanisms of revolving or financial sustainability) | The policy incorporate some innovative and diverse elements in its funding system || It does not require big inversion, it's not relevant | Yes, the policy incorporates as a main goal the incorporation of an innovative funding system that permits the sustainability and evoluction of the policy | ||||||
B.2 Framing | B.2.1 Social inclusiveness criterion | Is the policy focused on social inclusiveness? Does it make a purpose from identifying and targeting socially excluded groups | There is no mention of social inclusiveness as an objective of the policy | Social inclusiveness is a bonus, but it is not the main target | Social inclusiveness is the main goal of the policy | |||||
B.2.2 Targeting | Does the policy target groups which have not been (adequately) addressed by previous policies? (e.g., elderly unemployed, low-income household which do not receive social benefits) | It does not target specific vulnerable groups | It targets specific groups, but not specifically related to energy poverty needs (e.g., Large families) | It targets specific energy vulnerable groups | ||||||
B.3 Affected groups involvement and participation | B.3.1 Behaviour change | Does the policy aim to “educate” or to influence/change the behavior of individuals in their households and within the community? | Education is not mentioned in any way as an objective | Education is an objective, but not the main focus | The policy is entirely focused on education | |||||
B.3.2 Accesibility | Is it easily accessible for households? | No, a lot of bureaucracy, consultants or expert intervention is needed | Consultants would ease the application procedure, but the process is accessible to those with a basic understanding of the process | Yes, only a small amount of paperwork needed or it could be easily applied | ||||||
B.3.3 Affected groups empowerment | Does the policy promote and impulse the affected groups empowerment? | No, beneficiaries are only recipients “one time” recipients of some short term “blanket” measures | The policy attempts to combine blanket measures with measures aimed at changing behavior and improve quality of housing | Yes, the policy allows the beneficiaries to develop skills and acquire technical capabilities to prevent them from being energy poor in the long run | ||||||
B.4 Cooperation | B.4.1 Actors partnership | Does the policy aim to develop partnerships across multiple stakeholders/institutions? | No, the entire responsibility falls with only one stakeholder | The policy attempts to identify stakeholders and share responsibilities, but this is not properly done | Yes, there is a comprehensive perspective over the stakeholders and each has a responsibility | |||||
B.5 Monitoring innovation | B.5.1 Monitoring and evaluation tools | Does the policy specify clear follow-up, monitoring and measurement tools to ensure the effectiveness of the policy once implemented? | No, there is no kind of indicator of effectiveness | There are clear effectiveness indicators and monitoring mechanisms, it is clear who does the monitoring, but it is not clear what should be done if the policy is not effective | The outputs of the policy are constantly monitored, measured and reported. It is clear who oversees the monitoring and who is responsible and should intervene to improve the outcomes if necessary. The follow-up is embedded in the policy | |||||