Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Network companies fulfill a critical role in the energy transition. This article provides an empirical study of this role of a Dutch national gas network company connecting a biogas producer. This project requires choices about many intertwined technical and institutional variables. Choices involve multiple, potentially competing public values like safety, cost-efficiency, sustainability and non-discrimination. A formal governance structure provides generic guidelines for network companies about how to act in the public interest, but we argue that unclarity remains on how to trade-off public values. In these instances, a network company seeks legitimacy for the choices that are made. Via an in-depth case study on the injection of biogas we explored how a network company interpreted its public role and how public value trade-offs were made. We conclude that legitimacy is sought and found in a mixture of formal and informal ways both inside the network company as well as outside. Although the governance regime allowed the network company to take a leading role in the innovative project, it failed as a starting point to claim legitimacy. These findings provide food for thought on how to institutionally embed the role of network companies in the energy transition.

Keywords

governance network companies biogas public values legitimacy

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arcadis

Kema

and Kiwa (2011) Gaskwaliteit voor de toekomst. Den Haag, Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture & Innovation: 075413712.0.5.

Jorgensen

Beck T.

(2006) “Value consciousness and public management”, Organization Theory and Behaviour, 9(4): 510–536.

Beetham

(1991) The legitimation of power, New York: Palgrave.

Böttcher

(2013) Management von Biogas-Projekten, Heidelberg: Springer Gabler.

Boulamanti

Maglio

Donida S.

Giuntoli

and Agostini

(2013) “Influence of different practices on biogas sustainability”, Biomass Bioenergy, 53(June): 149–161.

Bozeman

(2007) Public values and public interest: Counterbalancing economic individualism, Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

De Bruijn

ten Heuvelhof

and in 't Veld

R.J.

(2003) Process Management: Why Project Management Fails in Complex Decision Making Processes, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.

De Bruijn

and Dicke

(2006) “Strategies for safeguarding public values in liberalized utility sectors”, Public administration, 84(3): 717–735.

De Bruijne

Steenhuisen

Correlje

ten Heuvelhof

and de Vries

(2011) “How to design a new gas bid price ladder? Exploring market design issues in the new Dutch gas balancing regime”, CRNI, 12(1): 83–97.

10.

Chang

(1997) Incommensurability, incomparability and practical reason, Cambridge, USA: Harvard University Press.

11.

Crozier

(1964) The Bureaucratic Phenomenon. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

12.

Gasunie (2009) Green gas to enter high pressure pipeline network for the first time. Retrieved September 3, 2016, from https://www.gasunie.nl/en/news/green-gas-to-enter-highpressure-pipeline-network-for-the-first-t?press=on.

13.

Jacobs

(1992) Systems of survival: A dialogue on the moral foundations of commerce and politics. London: Hodder and Stoughton.

14.

Jensen

M.C.

(2001) “Value maximization, stakeholder theory and the corporate objective function”, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 14(3): 8–21.

15.

Law

(2004) After method: Mess in social science research. London: Routledge.

16.

Lipsky

(1980) Street-level bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the individual in public services, New York: Russel Sage Foundation

17.

March

(1994) A primer on decision-making: How decisions happen, New York: The Free Press.

18.

Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture & Innovation (2011) Energierapport 2011. Den Haag.

19.

Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture & Innovation (2016), Energierapport 2016. Den Haag.

20.

Netbeheer Nederland (2011) Net voor de toekomst. Een verkenning. Arnhem.

21.

Netbeheer Nederland (2013) De proeftuin ‘decentrale duurzame collectieven. Arnhem.

22.

Reynaers

(2014) It takes two to tangle: Public-private partnerships and their impact on public values, dissertation, VU Amsterdam.

23.

Sanders

(2013) Publiek-Private Samenwerking in de Nederlandse energiesector, proefschrift aan de Universiteit Twente, Amsterdam: BOOM|Lemma.

24.

Steenhuisen

(2009) Competing public values: Coping strategies in heavily regulated utility industries, NGInfra dissertation, Delft University of Technology.

25.

Steenhuisen

and De Bruijne

(2015) “Reflections on the role of energy network companies in the energy transition”, Energy, Sustainability & Society, 5(25).

26.

Steenhuisen

and Van Eeten

(2013) “Patterns of coping with inconsistent demands in public service delivery”, Administration & Society, 45(9): 1130–1157.

27.

Taleb

(2012) Antifragile: Things that Gain from Disorder. Random House, New York.

28.

Tetlock

(2000) Coping with trade-offs: Psychological constraints and political implications, in: Elements of reason, Lupia

McCubbins

M.D.

Popkins

S.L.

(eds), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

29.

Thacher

(2001) “Conflicting values in community policing”, Law and Society Review, 35(4): 765–798.

30.

Thacher

and Rein

(2004) “Managing value conflict in public policy”, Governance, 17(4): 457–486.

31.

Veeneman

Dicke

and De Bruijne

(2009) “From clouds to hailstorms: A policy and administrative science perspective on safeguarding public values in networked infrastructures”, International journal of public policy, 4(5): 414–434.

32.

Viscusi

W.K.

(1992) Fatal trade-offs: Public and private responsibilities for risk, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

33.

Weiss

R.S.

(1995) Learning from strangers, New York: Free Press.

34.

Wildavsky

(1988). Searching for Safety. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.

How Do Network Companies Seek Legitimacy for Public Value Trade Offs?

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References