How Governance and Disasters Shape Renewable Energy Transitions: The Case of Japanese Mega‐Solar*

Abstract

Objectives This mixed‐methods study examines whether governance and disasters affect towns that host more renewable power plants, focusing on solar facilities in Japan after the 3/11 disaster. Methods I tested the effects of various factors on multiple sizes of feed‐in tariff certified solar power plants with negative binomial models. I confirmed those effects through process tracing using 14 interviews with local stakeholders from two prefectural case studies. Results Most prefectures boost solar power plant siting, especially for small plants 10–499 kilowatts (kW) in size. However, towns more damaged by disaster host less 10–499 kW plants because disasters create land‐use problems for solar. Conclusion When prefectures share information about renewable resources with local residents, they can compete more evenly with extraprefectural companies. However, disaster areas face extra governance challenges when introducing solar. Good subnational governance is vital to creating a more equitable, locally engaged renewable energy transition.

Build Back Better? Effects of Crisis on Climate Change Adaptation Through Solar Power in Japan and the United States

“…Third, we use matched samples in two countries to clarify two conflicting findings in past literature. Past scholars found that disaster damage was linked to increased adoption of solar farms in Japanese communities (Mochizuki and Chang 2017), but later studies found the opposite (Fraser 2019). We find that among similar communities, differing only in their exposure to disaster, they do tend to adopt more solar after crisis, consistent with Mochizuki and Chang's findings.…”

“…While policies of other types may diffuse from state to state, Matisoff (2008) found that the internal traits of governments mattered more to solar policy than diffusion, through motivations, resources, and obstacles specific to those governments. While national-level dynamics do not explain variation from city to city, recent studies have reapplied Matisoff's perspective to the city level, finding that governments' motivations, resources, and obstacles still matter to solar adoption (Fraser 2019).…”

“…Bonding connects members of the same social and ethnic groups and might lead to not-in-my-backyard movements against unpopular industrial installations (Hager and Haddad 2015;McPherson et al 2001). In contrast, bridging social ties connect residents across social and ethnic groups, fostering civic engagement, volunteerism, and good governance (Haddad 2012;Putnam 1993); bridging social capital helps neighborhoods start local solar cooperatives and public solar initiatives (Fraser 2019). Finally, linking social ties connect residents to local officials, helping them access public goods, funding, and subsidies for initiatives they care about (Aldrich 2019;Szreter and Woolcock 2004;Tsai 2007).…”

The Fukushima effect at home: The changing role of domestic actors in Japanese energy policy

“…While some found that some towns which suffered more damage in the 3.11 disaster hosted more mega-solar in the years following (Mochizuki & Chang, 2017), barriers to obtaining insurance, finding absentee land owners, and rezoning for solar meant that overall, disaster struck towns tend not to host solar. Instead Prefectural intervention thus significantly improves their ability to participate in renewable energy transition (Fraser, 2019b). Overall, prefectures seek work to meet prefectural targets for renewables while financially or logistically supporting ventures such as hydrogen power stations and small scale public microgrids, which are not currently in demand but represent important investments in technology adoption.…”

“…This remained true with a representative sample, even after incorporating the changing electricity prices, local jobs, fixed assets tax revenue for municipalities, reductions in air pollution and CO 2 emissions, and community preferences on energy policy (Chapman & Fraser, 2018; Fraser & Chapman, 2020). Even so, representatives from the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy report intentions to focus financial support in the future on small, community projects instead of the corporate beneficiaries of 2012 current FiT (Fraser, 2019b).…”