Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Public perceptions of demand-side management and a smarter energy future

Nature Climate Change volume 5, pages 550–554 (2015)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Demand-side management (DSM) is a key aspect of many future energy system scenarios1,2. DSM refers to a range of technologies and interventions designed to create greater efficiency and flexibility on the demand-side of the energy system3. Examples include the provision of more information to users to support efficient behaviour and new ‘smart’ technologies that can be automatically controlled. Key stated outcomes of implementing DSM are benefits for consumers, such as cost savings3,4 and greater control over energy use. Here, we use results from an online survey to examine public perceptions and acceptability of a range of current DSM possibilities in a representative sample of the British population (N = 2,441). We show that, although cost is likely to be a significant reason for many people to take up DSM measures, those concerned about energy costs are actually less likely to accept DSM. Notably, individuals concerned about climate change are more likely to be accepting. A significant proportion of people, particularly those concerned about affordability, indicated unwillingness or concerns about sharing energy data, a necessity for many forms of DSM. We conclude substantial public engagement and further policy development is required for widespread DSM implementation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Acceptability of DSM scenarios.
Figure 2: Relationships between affordability concerns, perceptions about household energy use, and acceptance of DSM.
Figure 3: Mediation of the relationship between social grade and acceptance of DSM by affordability concerns.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. DECC The UK Low Carbon Transition Plan: National Strategy for Climate and Energy (UK Government, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  2. National Grid UK Future Energy Scenarios: UK Gas and Electricity Transmission (UK Government, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  3. DEFRA The Potential for Behavioural and Demand-Side Management Measures to Save Electricity, Gas and Carbon in the Domestic Sector, and Resulting Supply-Side Implications—A Report by Enviros Consulting Limited: November 2008 (UK Government, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Giordano, V. et al. Smart Grid Projects in Europe: Lessons Learned and Current Developments (EU, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Makovich, L. J. The smart grid separating perception from reality. Issues Sci. Technol. 27, 61–70 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  6. DECC GB-Wide Smart Meter Roll Out for the Domestic Sector (UK Government, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Demski, C., Spence, A. & Pidgeon, N. Transforming the UK Energy System: Public Values, Attitudes and Acceptability—Summary Findings of a Survey Conducted August 2012 (UKERC, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Eurobarometer Climate Change: Special Eurobarometer 409 (European Commission, 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  9. DECC Smart Metering Implementation Programme: Publication of the Industry’s Draft Technical Specifications (UK Government, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hargreaves, T., Nye, M. & Burgess, J. Making energy visible: A qualitative field study of how householders interact with feedback from smart energy monitors. Energy Policy 38, 6111–6119 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mert, W., Suscheck-Berger, J. & Tritthart, W. Consumer Acceptance of Smart Appliances: D 5.5 of WP 5 Report from SMART-A project (2008); http://www.smart-a.org/WP5_5_Consumer_acceptance_18_12_08.pdf

  12. Asensio, O. I. & Delmas, M. A. Nonprice incentives and energy conservation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 510–515 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mah, D. N., Vleuten, J. M.V. D., Hills, P. & Tao, J. Consumer perceptions of smart grid development: Results of a Hong Kong survey and policy implications. Energy Policy 49, 204–216 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Modernizing Ontario’s Electricity System: Next Steps, Second Report of the Ontario Smart Grid Forum (OSGF, 2011); http://www.ieso.ca/imoweb/pubs/smart_grid/Smart_Grid_Forum-Report-May_2011.pdf

  15. DECC Quantitative Research Into Public Awareness, Attitudes, and Experience of Smart Meters: Wave 4 of 4 (UK Government, 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Goulden, M., Bedwell, B., Rennick-Egglestone, S., Rodden, T. & Spence, A. Smart grids, smart users? The role of the user in demand side management. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2, 21–19 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Butler, C., Parkhill, K. A. & Pidgeon, N. Deliberating energy transitions in the UK—Transforming the UK Energy System: Public Values, Attitudes and Acceptability (UKERC, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cavoukian, A., Polonetsky, J. & Wolf, C. SmartPrivacy for the Smart Grid: Embedding privacy into the design of electricity conservation. Identity Inf. Soc. 3, 275–294 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. The Cyber Security Coordination Task Group Smart Grid Cyber Security Strategy and Requirements—DRAFT NISTIR 7628 (Dept of Commerce, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  20. DECC Smart Metering Implementation Programme: A Call for Evidence on Data Access and Privacy (UK Government, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Verbong, G. P. J., Beemsterboer, S. & Sengers, F. Smart grids or smart users? Involving users in developing a low carbon electricity economy. Energy Policy 52, 117–125 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ehrhardt-Martinez, K., Donnelly, K. A. & Laitner, J. A. Advanced Metering Initiatives and Residential Feedback Programs: A Meta-Review for Household Electricity-Saving Opportunities (American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hayes, H. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-based Approach (Guildford Press, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hills, J. Fuel Poverty: The Problem and its Measurement. CASE Report, 69 (UK Government, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Faruqui, A., Sergici, S. & Sharif, A. The impact of informational feedback on energy consumption—A survey of the experimental evidence. Energy 35, 1598–1608 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Finucane, M., L. Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., Flynn, J. & Satterfield, T. A. Gender, race, and perceived risk: The ‘white male’ effect. Health Risk Soc. 2, 159–172 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lineweber, D. C. Understanding residential customer support for—and Opposition to—Smart Grid Investments. Electr. J. 24, 92–100 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gillingham, K., Harding, M. & Rapson, D. Split incentives in residential energy consumption. Energy J. 33, 37–62 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Neijens, P. The Choice Questionnaire. Design and Evaluation of an Instrument for Collecting Informed Opinions of a Population (Amsterdam Free University Press, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bowerman, B. L. & O’Connell, R. T. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences 07-054 Multivariate analysis of variance. (Sage, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work formed part of the programme of the UK Energy Research Centre and was supported by the Natural Environment Research Council award NE/G007748/1 (grant NE/I006753/1). Additional support was received from Horizon Digital Economy Research, RCUK grant (EP/G065802/1) and from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council award (EP/K002589/1). Thanks also go to the members of our advisory panel for providing insight and discussion, particularly at the design stages, and to Ipsos MORI for conducting this research, in particular M. Evans and E. Langley. Also thanks to the panel respondents for taking part in the research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Horizon Digital Economy Research/School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2TU, UK

    Alexa Spence

  2. Understanding Risk Research Group, Tyndall Centre and Climate Change Consortium of Wales, School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF10 3AT, UK

    Christina Demski & Nick Pidgeon

  3. Geography Department, The University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4RJ, UK

    Catherine Butler

  4. School of Environment, Natural Resources and Geography, Bangor University, Bangor, Gwynedd, LL57 2UW, Wales, UK

    Karen Parkhill

Authors
  1. Alexa Spence
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christina Demski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Catherine Butler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Karen Parkhill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nick Pidgeon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the design of this study, and the discussion of results and implications. C.D. led the design of the survey instrument. A.S. analysed the presented data and led in writing the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexa Spence.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Spence, A., Demski, C., Butler, C. et al. Public perceptions of demand-side management and a smarter energy future. Nature Clim Change 5, 550–554 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2610

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2610

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing