| Latest revision
Word
Format
PDF
Format
Abstracts
Breadth
Depth
References
Recommendations
Date of last update
08/30/2009 14:54:43 -0700
|
Challenges of Changing Public Perception and Effective Leadership for Energy
Policy: KAM VI
Tony E. Hansen
Knowledge Area Module (KAM) for Walden University
| Drafts |
Word
Format |
PDF
Format |
| Breadth |
 |
 |
| Depth |
 |
 |
| Application |
 |
 |
|
There are three major components that one must consider
with respect to an organizationÂ’s ability to wield an effective change
campaign: 1) power structure, 2) public opinion, and 3) leadership. The
effective leader will understand and work these areas to the advantage
of the mission. Reviewing ideas about power and agenda setting from
Mills and Domhoff, successful public policy campaigns will have to
consider how a policy might be perceived by higher strata people and
whether they may work to subvert the campaign. As noted in previous
discussions, public opinion is essential to gaining momentum on issues
and pushing political change. There are various ideas (pandering or
shirking) of how much public opinion actually impacts policy, but there
are some successful strategies that have been employed by organizations
to gain power elite support by using public opinion. Through
incremental successes, engaging leadership and collaborations,
organizations have built effective campaigns. These points will be
critical to reviewing current energy policy alternatives.
|
|
Three
specific potential obstacles should be considered with respect to
changing public policy: power elites, public opinion, and effective
leadership. Those elements require an organization to have effective
strategy that is flexible and the organization has to plan for
contingencies (especially with respect to national level policy
change). Effective leadership will align strategic support in various
sectors of the population to gain public support and find power elites
that can help perpetuate (raise the salience for) the public interest.
Public
opinion is a matter of collective perception of issues and standards.
Perception of issues is as much a cultural aspect as how one feels
connected to the issue. A qualitative study about riparian buffer zones
reveals that people with direct interest in changing may not realize
their own impact upon the issue and may actually reject that idea in
favor of a placing blame upon a so-called bigger entity (e.g. corporate
elites, government or agricultural interests). Some may not realize or
want to realize actual risk of the issues, and some will not trust
outside sources or power influences.
Essentially, public perception can not be expected to change quickly,
but rather perceptions can be changed through incremental efforts and a
sense of urgency that allow for realization. Proposed eventual scarcity
of fuel may require more decisive action and less ignorance of the risks
because there are mutual interests in loss of lifestyle and collective
technological prowess. The challenge for good leadership is to find
economic interests that can directly compete against status quo pursuits
that may be paths to inevitable failure. Doing this requires a
strategic plan that engages networks across sectors and regions as well
as effective leadership that can transcend community and social strata
in order to bring real sustainable energy policy to a strong public
interest. That public realization must occur well before actual scarcity
is the driver of price rather than the current undemocratic cartel that
are more interested in padding foreign treasuries than American
interests.
|
|
The
strategy for changing public perceptions via effective leadership is
founded in the principles of power, public opinion, and effective
leadership. Further, organizational efforts must understand the culture
and common perceptions of issues, power, and leadership in order to
effectively build a campaign (especially for a national campaign for
sustainable energy). In the demonstration here, a local market can
provide valuable information about how to proceed with building a
national coalition for sustainable behaviors. The
debates surrounding the energy initiatives (e.g. American Clean Energy
Act of 2009) are founded in fundamental resistance to change. People
get that the current system is weighted toward the energy companies
(especially oil), but people are willing to tolerate business as usual.
Meanwhile, we have supported dictatorships, seen rising costs, dwindling
supply, aging technology, and other countries have built cutting edge
technologies and engaged their populations in sustainable behaviors.
The problem with doing nothing substantially different than we are doing
today is highly risky considering inevitable depletion will dramatically
reverse any sense of affluence.
The energy industry is multifaceted and has made money
on the current policies and monopoly structure, and that power elite
will resist changing the current profit formula. If we continue to
allow public opinion to be swayed by the profit motivated arguments of
the status quo, we will continue to have aging infrastructure, reduction
of available resources, a missed opportunity, and severe reduced ability
to pay for future changes. As well, we easily forget our own
participation in the processes.
The proposal here is to build a campaign to make
meaningful change and legislation instead of relying upon a belief that
the private sector will find the cure to what ails the system. Today,
we are importing over 70% of the oil we use thanks to status quo
perceptions (Hansen, 2009; DOE, 2009; Pickens, 2008). The imports
contribute to our huge trade and federal budget deficits (due to the
subsidies and government support for the consumption and market
structure). Thus, the premise that the private sector will find a way
is misguided at best. We need a new direction instead of ignoring the
real issues or of ignoring the hard sacrifices required. Yet, there is
a chance for us to profit in new ways that are mutually beneficial to
the companies and the population if we move beyond consumption trends
and blind feelings of affluence.
The saying, “kicking the can down the road” is
appropriate, and the people that can make the change are you and me.
One can not expect future generations to pick up the can (do the work)
if that have only been examples of how to “kick the can more” (avoid the
real issue). We know what needs to be done and we know the transition
may not be easy. Yet, we can not continue to push the issues to future
generations or we will lose a great opportunity to invest in a bountiful
future.
When we push the burden towards future generations, we
miss the opportunity to be inventive and innovative in this generation.
At the same time, we hand our global competitors the crown of
technological prowess. Today, we can calculate what the costs are and
provide a plan for them. Today, we can creatively build technologies
and processes that the rest of the world will need.
In the future, if we do not change our habits and
perceptions today, those cost structures will not be flexible and the
technology may no longer be ours to design. Further, procrastination and
scarcity will force unpopular decisions against our economic security
and our present affluence since foreign powers are competing for the
same dwindling supply. We will be forced into abrupt changes and drastic
costs (more than the oil crises of 1970s or prices in 2008) regardless
of our means to address them at the time.
The energy issues are not new today, but with leadership
and collaborative effort, we can change social perceptions and public
policy because we are running out of time to get sustainable energy and
to reduce risky dependence upon foreign resources. Absent of
alternatives when the oil supply depletes, the todayÂ’s mobile economies
will slow to a virtual crawl with slower transportation (along with a
severe depression) (Hansen, 2009). Thus, we must persuade the pubic,
gain power elite support, and foster sustainable behaviors within the
community while persuading legislators to seek sustainable energy policy
rather than focus upon exploiting the dwindling limited supplies.
We can not continue to ignore the facts unless we plan
to fail, and we simply can not afford to miss this opportunity to do
something great for our future. We have to change the cultural habits
and consumption trends through a sustained effort that uses local people
and local examples that people can relate. Then we can gain power elite
support and persuade legislators to pass real sustainable energy policy
that encourages innovation, encourages conservation, and secures our
economic future as well as lifestyles. Individually, we can review our
own habits and see what we can do to consume less and be more productive
with what we have. For example, we can get energy audits for our homes,
drive less aggressively, and unplug unused devices. The status quo,
however, is a path to great failure, but we can plan now and change now
to build technology and techniques that propel economic growth and
sustainable energy.
|
References:
Aggul, F.,
Yalcin, M., Acikyildiz, M., & Sonmez, E. (2008, October). INVESTIGATION OF
EFFECTIVENESS OF DEMONSTRATION-SIMULATION BASED INSTRUCTION IN TEACHING
ENERGY CONSERVATION AT 7 TH GRADE. Journal of Baltic Science Education,
7(2), 64-77. Retrieved June 18, 2009, from Academic Search Complete
database.
Baker, R. (2002). Energy Policy: The Problem of Public Perception. In Bent,
R., Orr, L., & Baker, R. (2002) Energy: Science, Policy and the Pursuit
of Sustainability. Indiana University: Island Press.
Bent, R., Orr, L., & Baker, R. (2002) Energy: Science, Policy and the
Pursuit of Sustainability. Indiana University: Island Press.
Ben &
Jerry’s Foundation. (2008) Ben & Jerry’s Foundation – Guidelines.
Burlington, VT. Retrieved on 15 April 2008 from
http://www.benjerry.com/foundation/guidelines.html
Cohn, D.
(2008, May 28). Pricey Neighborhoods, High Stress. Pew Research Center.
Retrieved on 2 August 2009 from
http://pewsocialtrends.org/pubs/711/middle-class-blues
Doak, R.
(2009, Aug 9). Next Generation May Be on its Way Up. Des Moines Register.
Retrieved on 10 August 2009 from http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090809/OPINION01/908090317/-1/NEWS04
Domhoff, W.
(2006). Who Rules America? Power, Politics and Social Change. 5th
ed. Santa Cruz: McGraw Hill.
Dutcher, D.,
Finley, J., Luloff, A., & Johnson, J. (2004, April). Landowner Perceptions
of Protecting and Establishing Riparian Forests: A Qualitative Analysis.
Society & Natural Resources, 17(4), 329-342. Retrieved June 19, 2009,
from Academic Search Complete database.
Erikson, R.,
Mackuen, M. & Stimson, J. (2002). The Macro Polity. Cambridge: University
Press
Ewing Marion
Kauffman Foundation (2008) Funding Guidelines. Kansas City. Retrieved on 15
April 2008 from
http://www.kauffman.org/grants.cfm?topic=fundingguidelines
Friedlander,
S., & Sawyer, S. (1983, March). Innovation Traditions, Energy Conditions,
and State Energy Policy Adoption. Policy Sciences, 15(3), 307-324. Retrieved
June 18, 2009, from Business Source Complete database.
Hansen, T. E. (2009b). Collaboration is Key to Successful Organizations.
Walden University. Retrieved on 20 July 2009 from
www.iowapolicyresearch.org
Hansen, T. E. (2009a). Challenges to Sustainable Energy Policy and
Recommendations: KAM 5. Walden University. Retrieve from
http://www.iowapolicyresearch.org.
Johnson Tew,
C., & Havitz, M. (2002, March). Improving Our Communication: A Comparison of
Four Promotion Techniques. Journal of Park & Recreation Administration,
20(1), 76-96. Retrieved June 26, 2009, from Academic Search Complete
database.
Laird, F. (2001). Solar Energy, Technology Policy and Institutional
Values. Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. (2004). DonÂ’t Think of An Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame
the Debate. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.
Leiter, A. (2008, February). The Perils of a Half-Built Bridge: Risk
Perception, Shifting Majorities, and the Nuclear Power Debate. Ecology Law
Quarterly, 35(1), 31-72. Retrieved June 9, 2009, from Academic Search
Complete database.
Llewellyn,
J. (n.d.) The Importance of Riparian Forests. TCTWA. Retrieved on June 17,
2009 from http://www.tctcwa.org/html/body_riparian_forests.html.
Manza, J.,
Lomax Cook, F., & Page, B. (2002). Navigating Public Opinion. Oxford:
University Press.
Matta, J.,
Kerr, J., & Chung, K. (2005, July). From Forest Regulation to Participatory
Facilitation: Forest Employee Perspectives on Organizational Change and
Transformation in India. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management,
48(4), 475-490. Retrieved June 18, 2009, from EconLit with Full Text
database.
Morin, R.
(2008, Jul 29). AmericaÂ’s Four Middle Classes. Pew Research Center.
Retrieved on 2 August 2009 from http://pewresearch.org/pubs/911/americas-four-middle-classes
Morin, R. &
Taylor, P. (2009, Apr 23). Luxury or Necessity? The Public Makes a U-Turn.
Pew Research Center. Retrieved on 2 August 2009 from
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1199/more-items-seen-as-luxury-not-necessity
Mills, C. W.
(1956). The Power Elite. Oxford: University Press
Reed, B., & Swain, J. (1997). Public Finance
Administration. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schorr, L.
B. (1997). Common Purpose. New York: Anchor Books
Smith, V.
(1990, Winter). Can Public Information Programs Affect Risk Perceptions?.
Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 9(1), 41-59. Retrieved June 24,
2009, from EconLit with Full Text database.
Trochim,
William M.K. and Donnelly, James P. (2008) Research Methods Knowledge
Base. 3rd ed. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning
University
of Iowa (UI) Healthcare. (2005). Radon Exposure and Lung Cancer. University
of Iowa. Retrieved on 22 June 2009 from
http://www.uihealthcare.com/news/news/2005/03/21radon.html
University
of Iowa. (2008). Iowa Principles and Practices for Charitable Nonprofit
Excellence. University of Iowa. Retrieved on 16 August 2009 from
http://nonprofit.law.uiowa.edu
US EPA.
(2009). Radon | Indoor Air Quality. US EPA. Retrieved on 22 June 2009 from
http://www.epa.gov/radon/.
Vaughan, S., & Arsneault, S. (2008, September). Not-for-Profit Advocacy:
Challenging Policy Images and Pursuing Policy Change. Review of Policy
Research, 25(5), 411-428. Retrieved June 9, 2009,
doi:10.1111/j.1541-1338.2008.00344.x
Virginia
Department of Forestry. (2009) Riparian Forest Buffers. Virginia Department
of Forestry. Retrieved on 17 June 2009 from
http://www.dof.virginia.gov/rfb/index.shtml
Wallner, J. (2008, August). Legitimacy and Public Policy: Seeing Beyond
Effectiveness, Efficiency, and Performance. Policy Studies Journal, 36(3),
421-443. Retrieved June 9, 2009, doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00275.x
Whitmarsh, L. (2008, May). Are flood victims more concerned about climate
change than other people? The role of direct experience in risk perception
and behavioural response. Journal of Risk Research, 11(3), 351-374.
Retrieved June 9, 2009, doi:10.1080/13669870701552235
Wilk, R. (2002). Culture and Energy Consumption. In Bent, R., Orr, L., &
Baker, R. (2002) Energy: Science, Policy and the Pursuit of
Sustainability. Indiana University: Island Press.
|