Chelsea Gondeck - Final Thesis

Running head: RE: SYNTHESIZING PATH-DEPENDENCE & ORGANIZATIONAL

CHANGE

Renewable Energy Adoption for Municipal Colorado:

Synthesizing Path-Dependence and Organizational Change

by

CHELSEA JORDAN GONDECK

B.A., University of Colorado Colorado Springs, 2014

Submitted to the

Faculty of the Graduate School of the

University of Colorado in partial fulfillment

of the requirements for the degree of

Master’s in Political Science

with an emphasis in Politics and Public Policy

University of Colorado Denver

2016

RE: SYNTHESIZING PATH-DEPENDENCE & ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE 2

Gondeck, Chelsea Jordan (M.A., University of Colorado Denver New Directions Program)

Renewable Energy Adoption for Municipal Colorado: Synthesizing Path-Dependence and

Organizational Change

Directed by Professor Michael Cummings

ABSTRACT

The increasingly prevalent environmental, health, and economic effects of energy

production from non-renewable resources has made adoption of renewable energy-production an

increasingly important topic for energy providers. However, there has not been a broad

movement for municipal providers to pursue adoption of renewable energy, and little research

has been contributed to the specific factors that often affect municipal providers. This research

addresses what factors influence the municipality’s pursuit of renewable-energy adoption;

specifically, whether municipalities with dissimilar attributes (Aspen and Fort Morgan,

Colorado) are ultimately affected by the same factors. And lastly, if a synthesis of cultural,

political, economic, and institutional factors with steps of organizational change appropriately

illustrate the transition to renewable energy sources. The resulting process of the synthesis can be

translated to other organizations to increase the rate of transitions to renewable energy

production.

“I don’t understand why when we destroy something created by man we call it vandalism, but

when we destroy something by nature we call it progress.” –Ed Begley Junior


DEDICATION

“People will kill you. Over time. They will shave out every last morsel of fun in you with little,

harmless sounding phrases that people use every day, like: 'Be realistic!'"

― Dylan Moran

This work is dedicated to my mother and father, who have always empowered me to do whatever

I set my mind to;

To my co-workers, who moved me through my work-life-school balance;

And to my friends, I hope I’ve convinced you to vote for me one day.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

University of Colorado Denver:

Professor Michael Cummings, Chair

Gary Sears, Executive Director of New Directions

Ronald Miller, MPA, CCM

Aspen, Colorado:

David Hornbacker, Director of Utilities and Environmental Initiatives

Ashley Perl, Climate Action Manager

Fort Morgan, Colorado:

Jeff Wells, City Manager

Brent Nation, Director of Water Resources and Utilities

Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska (MEAN)


TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................6

Research Questions ..........................................................................................................17

II. LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................19

Comparative Approaches to Renewable Energy Adoption .............................................19

Organizational Change Theory ........................................................................................25

III. METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................................35

IV. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS ........................................................................................38

Municipal Governments and Sustainability .....................................................................38

Synthesis of Comparative Theory and Organizational Change .......................................40

Aspen, Colorado ..............................................................................................................45

Fort Morgan, Colorado ....................................................................................................51

V. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................59

REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................63


CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

“Energy has a powerful and perhaps unmatched influence on our economy, environment,

health, politics, international relations and general well-being…it is heavily regulated

[and] considered a ‘public good’’’ (Attanasio, 2015, p. 217).

Problem Area: Non-Renewable Energy Generation and Climate Change

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), climate change encompasses

significant changes in the climate that last several decades or longer; these changes include

measures of temperature, precipitation, wind patterns, etc. (EPA, n.d.-a). In recent years there

has been less dispute among atmospheric scientists on the definitive scientific evidence of the

causal relationship between increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the

atmosphere and climate change occurrences (Freeman, 2015). However, the ideological divide

continues to diverge. According to the Pew Research Center 92% of liberal Democrats believe

there is “solid evidence” of global warming, but only 38% of conservative Republicans believe

the same, and a mere 14% of the latter say global warming is a very serious problem (Kiley,

2015).

Greenhouse gases include: carbon dioxide, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and

fluorinated gases, all of which are generally produced by the burning of fossil fuels, as well as

the production and transport of fossil fuels, agricultural activities, and industrial processes. The

emissions from GHGs cause the trapping of heat in the atmosphere, heat that in turn leads to the

associated climate changes. A majority of these destructive GHGs are emitted from the burning

of fossil fuels specifically for energy production; however, deforestation, industrial processes,

and some agricultural practices also contribute (EPA, n.d.-a).


36.0%

27.4%

18.7%

9.5%

8.5%

2013 U.S. Energy Consumption by Energy

Source

Petroleum

Natural Gas

Coal

Renewable

Nuclear

Energy Generation

Electricity generation is a major contributor to the GHG emissions associated with

climate change. In the U.S., “energy-related activities, primarily fossil fuel combustion,

accounted for the vast majority of CO2 emissions” between 1990 and 2013 (EPA, 2015, p. 18).

These activities also accounted for 43% of CH4 emissions and 12% of N2O emissions.

Combined, all energy-related activities accounted for 84.6% of the U.S. GHG emissions in 2013

(p. 19). In conjunction, 82% of the energy consumed in the U.S. in 2013 came from non-

renewable sources.

Figure 1. Illustrates the U.S.’s consumption of energy by source for the year 2013.

Environmental Effects

The effects of climate change caused by GHGs emitted from non-renewable electricity

generation are extensive. First and foremost, climate change affects the environment. After

2014’s ranking as the warmest year on record, the World Meteorological Organization (2015)

reported that “fourteen of the fifteen hottest years have all been this century.” The rising levels of

GHGs are expected to continue contributing to the global temperature warming. Some scientists


argue that warming trends have occurred prior to industrialization; however, it is the “pace and

scale” that are “large and rapid” that distinguish today’s cycles from cycles of the past (Freeman,

2015, p. 338).

These warming cycles have contributed to ocean levels’ rising eight inches since the era

of industrialization. Since 1992 alone, levels have risen at twice the rate of the entire previous

century. Current conservative projections call for an additional foot of rise by 2100, if not the

plausible high-end estimate of four feet (National Climate Assessment, 2014). According to the

U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, another “widespread and conspicuous”

effect of climate change on the oceans is bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef. The coral reefs

provide an important service to ocean ecosystems by decreasing coastline exposure to waves and

storms. However, the continued ocean warming and acidification damage the reef-based fisheries

and diminish the ocean’s capacity for mitigating these occurrences (“Climate Change May Be to

Blame,” 2016). Additionally, a climate scientist (and former director of NASA’s Goddard

Institute for Space Studies) has published a paper predicting that a global temperature rise of

only two degrees Celsius could cause superstorms that “hurl ocean boulders hundreds of feet into

the air” and inundate coastal cities, in manners reminiscent of The Day After Tomorrow (Meyer,

2016).

The changing weather patterns could fundamentally compromise the necessities of

human survival, including risks to the food supply (Freeman, 2015, p. 343). According to the

EPA:

More extreme temperature and precipitation can prevent crops from growing.

Extreme events, especially floods and droughts, can harm crops and reduce yields.

For example, in 2008, the Mississippi River flooded just before the harvest period

for many crops, causing an estimated loss of $8 billion for farmers.


Dealing with drought could become a challenge in areas where summer

temperatures are projected to increase and precipitation is projected to decrease.

As water supplies are reduced, it may be more difficult to meet water demands.

Many weeds, pests, and fungi thrive under warmer temperatures, wetter

climates, and increased CO2 levels. Currently, farmers spend more than $11

billion per year to fight weeds in the United States. The ranges of weeds and pests

are likely to expand northward. This shift would cause new problems for farmers'

crops previously unexposed to these species. Moreover, increased use of

pesticides and fungicides may negatively affect human health. (EPA, n.d.-b)

Figure 2. Illustrates the effect of extreme weather events on the yield of crops including

wheat, maize, sunflower, and cotton. Adapted from EPA, n.d.-b Retrieved March 23,

2016, from https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/impacts/agriculture.html

The agricultural effects cyclically affect livestock as well. A single heat wave, produced

by climate change, can cause losses of more than 5,000 animals nationwide. Heat stress not only

increases vulnerability to disease, but also reduces fertility and, consequently, milk production,

as well as feed supply that is directly related to the issues of crop production. Seasonal changes

could also lead to both an increased prevalence of parasites and pathogens, and challenges to the

maintenance of a thriving environment by which they survive more easily (EPA, n.d.-b).


Health Effects

The production of electricity from fossil fuels affects more than the environment.

According to the Clean Air Task Force, there is no greater risk “to human health…than coal-

fired power plants” (Schneider & Banks, 2010). The air pollution from non-renewable sources

“indisputably contributes to serious lung and heart disease,” as well as the incidence of disease in

general (Freeman, 2015, pp. 345-346). The health concerns extend beyond air conditions. The

“mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants are a proven neurotoxin” (p. 346)--a

neurotoxin that, when deposited in the ocean, accumulates in fish that are in turn ingested by

humans. Even low levels of prenatal exposure to these neurotoxins compromise cognitive

function.

Two additional comprehensive studies by the Task Force found that the “U.S. power

sectors cause tens of thousands of premature deaths each year” in addition to “hundreds of

thousands of heart attacks, asthma attacks, emergency room visits, hospital admission, and lost

workdays.” The monetary value of these effects is more than $100 billion annually. Estimates

have decreased in direct relation to the reduced emissions from coal-fired plants; however, there

is still a need for “stronger measures to further mitigate the still unacceptably high burden of

death and disease” from these sources (Schneider & Banks, 2010). The American College of

Physicians (ACP) has called for “aggressive, concerted” action to curb GHGs in order to fight

the negative health effects of climate change (as cited in Thompson, 2016). According to the

President of the college, Dr. Wayne Riley, the harm and “manifestation of these health

problems” will only continue if climate change is not mitigated (Thompson, 2016). The ACP has

begun advising members to support policies to address climate change and reduce their carbon

footprint since “the health sector is ranked second-highest in energy use” (Thompson, 2016).


While President Riley believes that "there is clear, compelling scientific consensus that climate

change is real," he hopes that the credibility of “a science-based association of physicians taking

this stance” will persuade the remaining skeptics (Thompson, 2016).

Economic Effects

Climate-change issues also have significant economic impacts. Examples include the

costs associated with repairing the destruction caused by both hurricane Sandy in 2012 and the

cold wave of 2014 (Alló & Loureiro, 2014). According to some measures, addressing the

destruction posed by climate change could cost up to 20% of the global gross domestic product

(GDP) (Hallegatte & Corfee-Morlot, 2011). One study found that the effects of the rising

temperature alone (not including impacts of natural disasters) would widen global inequality and

cause a 23% reduction in global economic production in the next century (Maclay, 2015). For

example, the economies that depend on ecotourism, such as Australia and the Caribbean, will be

dampened (“Climate Change May Be to Blame,” 2016).

Beyond the costs associated with unmitigated climate change, the fuel source is non-

renewable. Eventually the limit of supply, in direct relation to the constant demand, will make

the fossil fuel sources extremely costly. The costs could potentially extend to include supply

security: in other words, the issues of dependence on oil-exporting countries and the military

costs to ensure the access and retrieval (Freeman, 2015).

If mitigating efforts are not increased, the risks of irreversible global effects are high

(Freeman, 2015). A majority of Americans now believe that human activities are either partially,

or fully, responsible for these global temperature risings, but Americans are not as strongly

convinced as other countries’ constituents (Carlsson et al., 2012); Americans are also more


pessimistic about the possibility of mitigating climate change and its harmful effects. Regardless,

it is apparent something has to be done.

Renewable Energy Generation

While some climate-change mitigation options call for the attempt to control the harmful

effects caused by electricity generation from fossil fuels (e.g. carbon capture and sequestration,

direct CO2 capture, and geo-engineering), no viable option is as comprehensive as a cleaner

energy supply and generation process (Freeman, 2015). Renewable energy production is

relatively new in comparison to the fossil fuel industry. Additionally, renewable energy

production is still small on an “absolute basis” but is nonetheless the “fastest growing source of

power globally” (p. 334). With strategic investment, some scientists calculate that the world

could transition to a zero-carbon economy in under 100 years; moreover, it “could be done at a

cost of less than two percent of GDP over the entire period” (p. 335).

Failure to Adopt

A major contributor to the problem of climate change is the emissions release by

electricity generation from non-renewable resources. Why have some electricity providers

pursued adoption of renewable energy, while other providers have continued production from

fossils fuels? To some scientists, the argument is that “cost, scale, infrastructure, and storage” are

going to be the determining factors of the viability of renewable energies (p. 335). However, the

problem of climate change is a topic that crosses all boundaries (political, geographic, ethical,

etc.). It affects each and every individual that resides on Earth, if one prefers to avoid extinction.

While renewable electricity generation has functioned successfully and garnered widespread

support, it is still not being actively pursued by all generators. In fact, in 2015 the G7 (Group of

7) nations had committed to ending the “fossil fuel age” by the end of the century, an


achievement considered possible by some scientists (Connolly, 2015). However, worldwide

energy production from renewables was only 22% in 2013, and in the next seven years is

expected to rise only an additional three percent (International Energy Agency, 2015).

Climate change is ultimately a supra-national issue. A majority of the research on

adoption of renewable energy has been focused on the global and international level. However,

the knowledge of the issues trickles down and affects the minutest political structures, including

the municipalities that are often responsible for the generation of electricity; and thus it relates to

the associated effects of climate change. In the United States, the federal and state governments

are often the entities responsible for mandates and standards intended to address the concerns.

Recently, municipalities have become more involved as a matter of opposing the programs that

“require action without supplying the necessary funds” (Adolino & Blake, 2010, p. 374).

In December 2015, one such mandate occurred when 196 parties to the United Nation’s

(UN) Framework Convention on Climate Change approved what is known as the Paris

Agreement at the 21st Conference of Parties (Sutter, Berlinger, & Ellis, 2015). Amongst a variety

of goals, the agreement seeks to limit the increasing global temperatures to 2 degrees Celsius

above pre-industrial levels. In April 2016, the UN hosted a signing event at which 175 entities

signed the document (“Today is an historic day,” 2016). Amongst those that signed were China

and the United States, which make up 24% and 14% of global emissions, respectively (Sutter,

Berlinger, & Ellis, 2015). The signatures are an important step in the process, as the agreement

cannot enter into force until at least 55 countries that account for 55% of greenhouse gas

emissions sign and ratify the agreement. However, the grounds for ratification in the United

States through executive action are precarious. A key element to President Obama’s plan to meet

the reduction in emissions was the implementation of the Clean Power Plan (McGrath, 2016).


Claiming infringement on states’ rights, a coalition of 27 states sought to overturn the plan. In a

5-4 vote the U.S. Supreme Court suspended the plan till litigation concludes. In addition, the

upcoming presidential election will also play a large part in the U.S.’s commitments, with

Hillary Clinton pledging enactment and Donald Trump forcefully denouncing the Paris

Agreement (Davenport, 2016). While President Obama intends on ratifying the agreement

through an executive action before his departure from office, without Congress’ agreement,

several Republican politicians have argued that the President’s commitment will mean nothing

(Richardson, 2016). Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe claims that it will merely represent “empty

promises that will have no meaningful impact on the climate” (Richardson, 2016).

Considering the increasing prevalence of environmental regulations (and general public

awareness of the negative side effects of electricity generation from fossil fuels), understanding

the complexity of issues surrounding the adoption of renewable energy will become

progressively more important to the local producers and providers.

The problem to be addressed is the complex, multifold issue of energy production by

public utilities. First, the concern stems from the multitude of issues that the production of

electricity from non-renewable resources causes to the climate. Second, is the failure to adopt

renewable energy production by public utilities despite the changing political climate,

environmental issues, and policies. Third, is the waning competitiveness of renewable energy

production by the United States, specifically Colorado municipalities, in comparison to other

countries’ municipalities. This decline may be due to the United States’ “all-the-above” approach

to energy that inconsistently augments the renewable-energy industry while reliably supporting

conventional sources (Colorado is the sixth-top producing state for natural gas, and seventh for

crude oil). This disadvantage is concerning because of the vast amount of energy production in


the United States, and Colorado, by public utilities whose main goal is providing a reliable and

cost-effective product to citizens.

Colorado has a long energy history, dating back to its foundation by which “smoke-

belching plants spurred economic growth along the Front Range” (Andrews, 2010, p. 61). Some

of the frontiersman of the late 1800s saw Colorado as an opportunity for benevolent coal

extraction. Unfortunately the coal industry “exemplified…the necessity of government

safeguards to ensure working people’s right to organize in defense of their lives and liberties”

(Andrews, 2010, pp. 6-7). The rapacity of the mine owners led to “the deadliest, most destructive

uprising by American workers since Southern slaves had fought for their emancipation during

the Civil War…victims of the Ten Days’ War pushed the total death toll for Colorado coalfield

war of 1913-1914 to at least seventy-five and perhaps as many as a hundred” leading to “a grand

total of 369 murder indictments, 191 charges of arson, and 100 charges of assault with intent to

kill” (Andrews, 2010, p. 14). Perhaps the silence of the contemporary municipalities is

reminiscent of the lack of monuments of public commemoration of the Ten Days War in

Colorado. Coal supplies and the coalfield wars unmask the intertwining of “social, industrial, and

environmental” issues in Colorado’s non-renewable energy history to be equally as rich and

holistic as contemporary energy disputes (Andrews, 2010, p. 15). There is a realization that

“balancing the interests of humankind and nature” is more difficult than one may initially

imagine (Andrews, 2010, p. 49). Colorado’s past and present “converge around a shared

dependence on fossil fuels and a troubling propensity to overlook the human suffering and

environmental destruction that our appetite for energy inflicts on distant hinterlands” (Andrews,

2010, p. 50).


In the United States, publicly owned utilities make up a substantial majority (61%) of the

energy providers, with cooperatives contributing another 26.5%, and only 5.7% provided by

investor-owned utilities (American Public Power Association, 2015). Considering the magnitude

of municipalities that are, or will be, affected by the increasing issues and regulations associated

with climate change, it is surprising that a majority of the previous comparative research on

adopting renewable energy production has been largely pure research focused on a supra-

national level (i.e., countries), relying on a singular approach (e.g., institutional), and generally

targeting European concentrations (e.g., Germany). Therefore, the body of research has

effectively disregarded the intricacies of a comprehensive set of factors on the path-dependent

approach to adoption of renewable energy, by municipal level providers in the United States

(more specifically, Colorado).

The intent of this project is to synthesize a path-dependent comparative approach

(theoretical and pure) with organizational-change theory (pragmatic and applied) to understand

how and why Colorado municipalities pursue and adopt renewable energy production. The path-

dependent approach will provide factors (e.g., cultural demographic factors, political party

affiliations, economic development opportunities, and institutional policies) that have been well-

established in the body of previous research. The validation of path-dependent factors will create

a stronger foundation for the attempt to mesh with organizational-change theory that has not had

a robust history of application to renewable-energy production, but has a history of success in

large organizational transitions.


Research Questions

The purpose of this comparative case study will be to examine a comprehensive

assortment of cultural, political, economic, and institutional factors influencing the path-

dependent approach to adoption of renewable energy on a municipal level. Using a comparative

perspective on characteristically different systems, the research will seek an explanation of the

critical influences on the cities of Aspen and Fort Morgan, Colorado in the process of adoption

of renewable energy production. A synthesis of path-dependency (specifically historical, self-

reinforcing dynamics) and organizational-change theory (e.g., creating urgency, building a

guiding coalition, and instituting change) will be examined in the process of exploring the

equifinality of two distinctly different municipalities’ pursuit of adopting renewable energy.

The research will answer the following questions: What factors influence municipalities

in Colorado to pursue adoption of renewable energy? Specifically, are municipalities with

dissimilar attributes ultimately affected by the same or different factors in the process of

adopting renewable energy? Can the reinforcing dynamics of path-dependent theories be

synthesized with factors of organizational-change theory to explain the pursuit and adoption of

renewable energy?

In both cases, the cities of Aspen and Fort Morgan, it looks as though path-dependent

factors (i.e., cultural, political, economic and institutional) influence a municipality’s pursuit and

adoption of renewable energy. Aspen and Fort Morgan have immensely disparate cultures,

political leanings, economies, and institutions; however, both have adopted, and continue to

adopt, renewable energy resources. While the populations of these municipalities have

contrasting demographic characteristics, analysis of the historical trends aligns both cities with

steps of effective organizational change. Therefore, the pursuit and adoption of renewable energy


resources can be accomplished by implementing specific steps of organizational change that are

appropriate for municipalities with a wide variety of demographics. Considering the importance

of addressing climate change, and the large quantity of publicly produced power, this synthesis

can be utilized to advance and expand the adoption of renewable energy sources to a larger pool

of power providers. While the current research addresses two diverse municipalities, both are

within the state of Colorado, narrowing the scope of differing circumstances to some extent.

Future research ought to investigate other municipalities, and private industries, to determine

whether similar steps of organization change hold true. Additionally, the research could be

utilized in an attempt to implement the change in an organization that has not yet begun

transitioning to renewable energy resources, again to see whether the process is successful.


CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW

Comparative Approaches to Renewable Energy Adoption

Within the comparative school of political science research are four general approaches:

cultural, political, economic, and institutional. However, the approaches are very limited and

often overlap. A more recent development in comparative analysis is a path-dependent approach

that illustrates an eclectic and encompassing approach.

Cultural School

The cultural school of comparative politics attempts to explain that cultural attitudes,

values, and traditions either promote governmental intervention in a certain policy arena or

reduce the probability of the involvement in the policy-making process (Adolino & Blake, 2015).

One approach within the cultural school is the public-opinion approach by which contemporary

attitudes are polled on a balance between governmental involvement and individual

responsibility. However, the approach is often inconclusive, as citizens can think that the

government “should” be involved in an activity (e.g., protect the environment), but can also

support cutting governmental spending overall, as well as for a specified activity (e.g.,

renewable-energy generation). Additionally, public opinion may strongly support an issue, but

that fact does not necessarily translate to driving policy making; rather Kingdon (2003) argues

that there is a complex and contingent relationship (as cited in Laird & Stefes, 2009).

There has been extensive research on the relationship between cultural dimensions and

renewable-energy infrastructure on a national level. Kaminsky (2016) found that across 66

nations Hofstede’s cultural dimensions of high uncertainty avoidance and high individualism-

collectivism were significant factors in the adoption of renewable energy. Meaning: nations that

are more uncomfortable with uncertainty and more individualistic are more likely to adopt


renewable energy because it is seen to provide an improvement to grid reliability and exist in

more distributive forms, respectively. Kaminsky (2016) argues that appealing to empathy of the

negative impacts of non-renewable electricity generation on others may be one mechanism to

spread the adoption of renewable energy. However, the motivation to avoid uncertainty and

increase independence of electrical supply would have an even greater impact. Kaminsky

recommends further research at the community level.

Alló and Loureiro (2014) argue that social factors have a strong explanatory influence on

preference towards policies regarding climate change, but that these factors have been generally

ignored (p. 564). Specifically, a country’s long-term versus short-term orientation; in other

words, a society’s increased valuation of pragmatic future perspectives instead of conventional

historical short-term factors. Findings of a meta-regression of 58 studies concluded that countries

with longer-term planning methods have a higher willingness to pay for initiatives that fight

climate change. While Alló and Loureiro’s work does support the influence of social norms, it

ultimately includes a willingness-to-pay argument, that also entails economic factors.

Political School

The political school of comparative analysis argues that political parties and interest

groups contribute as important influences on the policy dynamics of a country (Adolino & Blake,

2015). Specific approaches vouch that labor party control of executive and legislative offices is

correlated with the expansion of government spending. The similar-party governmental models

argue that swift change occurs more readily (whether contraction, expansion, or particular

designation of funds) in governments when the executive and legislative branches are shared by

the same party. Interest-group politics also play a part through the size and financial resources

directly affecting the agenda-setting of the current government (p. 40).


Political-orientation approaches have repeatedly found that liberal individuals

consistently have a higher willingness to pay for initiatives that address climate-change issues

than individuals with more conservative views (Carlsson, 2012; Wiser, 2007); accordingly, states

with liberal leanings are more supportive of renewable energy than conservative states (Wiener

and Koontz, 2010). Democratic presidential nominees have also run on platforms of reducing the

country’s dependence on fossil fuels, mitigating impacts of climate change, and increasing

financial support for renewable sources, while conservatives have taken the stance of promoting

conventional sources (Krauss, 2012). Additionally, states with a Republican Party dominance are

less likely than those with Democratic Party dominance (measured by number of party

affiliations in the House and Senate) to adopt renewable portfolio standards (RPS). Renewable

portfolio standards are policies that promote, or mandate, a percentage of energy production

from renewables (Huang, Alavalapati, Carter, & Langholtz, 2007). Furthermore, according to

Carley & Miller (2012) citizen ideology is a significant predictor of RPS adoption; however,

strong policy designs are better predicted by the ideology of the government (similar to Huang et

al.’s 2007 findings).

Interest groups (specifically those funded by providers of conventional energy

production) can effectively hamper the transition to renewable energy production; however, there

are cases in which the tactics are ineffective and can be overcome. For example, the German

Energiewende has been extremely successful even with criticism from Germany’s historical

power oligopoly (Gawel, Strunz, & Lehmann, 2013). The actors in the centralized, fossil-fuel

market structure attack the renewable energy policies, yet the attempts to discredit renewables

have dissolved and the negative externalities of the conventional fuels have been revealed. In the

same way that conventional-energy providers can benefit from having interest groups working


on their behalf, so too can the renewable-energy interests (Lyon & Yin, 2010). There can also be

an interaction between interest groups and political affiliation that affects the adoption of

renewable energy. For instance, Democrats receive more financial contributions from

environmental groups and voters, and in turn enact institutional mechanisms that support the

adoption of renewable energy (Berry, Laird, & Stefes, 2015; Huang et al., 2007).

Economic School

The economic school explores the short- and long-term effects of economic changes,

specifically the resources available to a country (Adolino & Blake, 2015). For example,

economic growth not only generates more revenue for government entities, but can generate

legitimacy about the public ability to address problems. The opposite can occur as well, by

which an economic downturn generates suspicion about success through government action.

Longer-term trends such as a country’s affluence can contribute to an assurance that problems

(e.g., preserving the environment) can occur without impeding the standard of living. The

demographic graying factor, or the predominance of older citizens, can drive the demand for

particular services and affect the decisions on how governmental revenue (less of it due to less

working population) is expended. For example, an increase in retirement benefits rather than

renewable energy infrastructure. The globalization of society has also created an

interconnectedness by which domestic policy often cannot ignore the international context of its

decisions. Lastly, the adoption of renewable-energy sources could foster an increased demand for

more specialized (and well-paying) jobs. When renewable energy is considered a means of economic

growth and job creation, the level of support for policies that promote the technology is increased, even in

conservative legislators and citizens (Weiner & Koontz, 2010). Affluence has also been referenced as

an influential factor in renewable-energy matters. Some studies illustrate an eventual positive


relationship between affluence and both environmental quality (Koop & Tole, 1999) and the

likelihood of implementing an RPS (Berry, Laird, & Stefes, 2015).

Institutional School

The institutional school frames the formal and informal institutions that create the rules

and frame the policy-making process (Adolino & Blake, 2015). The approach often focuses on

the formal interactions between national and subnational governments or between executive and

legislative offices. However, non-elected officials can also serve as institutional influences on

policy. For example, the bureaucratic approach demonstrates that characteristics of the agency

implementing policy can affect the influence over policy-making. In opposition, new

institutionalism takes into account the effect of informal norms and patterns and input of non-

governmental organizations on policy-making.

Policies can be an immensely powerful institution for the adoption of renewable energy.

Budget decisions for agencies that support research and development (R&D) of renewable-

energy options are amongst the various policies that affect adoption. For instance, President

Reagan’s reduction in funding for R&D and subsequent reduction in staffing for the agencies

spearheading the efforts, ultimately undermined the entities’ ability and effectiveness (Laird &

Stefes, 2009). Policies that ensure funding are continuously important, even after initial success,

in the transition or adoption of new systems and infrastructure (Rahman, Paatero, Poudyal &

Lahdelma, 2013). In opposition, when funding policies are short-term, and inconsistent, an

atmosphere of uncertainty for investing is created, and renewable energy adoption is erratic and

shifts accordingly (Laird & Stefes, 2009). For example, specific policies such as tax credits

subsidize the initial costs of transition; however, when institutional drift allows for the expiration


of the legislation that upholds these financial incentives, there is a significant drop in the level of

adoption.

Some of the most widely cited policies for renewable energy come in the form of

portfolio standards, or regulatory mandates for the increased production of energy from

renewable sources (and parallel decreases in GHG emissions). Renewable portfolio standards

can even overcome the political-affiliation factors (often barriers) to the adoption of renewable

energy. An example is the coalition of environmentalists, solar advocates, and conservative

legislators that influenced an all-Republican commission to adopt a plan that increases

renewable-energy capacity requirements for a Georgia power company (Shulman, 2013). The

Georgia case also exhibited overcoming interest-group influence, specifically, a scare campaign

by Americans for Prosperity. The organization, funded by the billionaire fossil-fuel mogul Koch

brothers, made allegations that the standards would reduce reliability of appliances and increase

electricity rates “up to 40 percent” (Shulman, 2013). Regardless, the Republican commission

approved the plan for an RPS.

Path-Dependence

As the preceding research illustrates, single isolated factors rarely exert a dominant

influence on the course of events related to renewable energy. Often the attempts to replicate

findings can lead new research to undermine, or conflict with, past results, or put separate factors

at odds for different contextual situations. For example, the benefits of economic development

related to renewable energy may serve as a stimulus for change in one state but not in another

(Weiner & Koontz, 2010). Rather, an eclectic mix of cultural, political, economic, and

institutional dynamics creates the variations on the adoption of renewable energy between and

within countries (Adolino & Blake, 2015). Singular approaches often do not incorporate all the


factors, including the interaction with geography, crises, and historical actions, in the pursuit of a

particular end.

From this deficiency, an eclectic approach emerged. Known as path-dependence, this

approach illustrates that decisions to pursue certain policies (e.g., pursuing adoption of

renewable-energy generation) are contingent on a variety, and interaction, of historic

institutional, social, political, and economic circumstances in conjunction with critical windows

of opportunity (Laird & Stefes, 2009). In a broader sense, when attempts to make changes do not

incorporate a comprehensive set of factors (i.e., cultural, political, economic, institutional), the

conclusions often fall short of the intended outcomes (Weiner & Koontz, 2010). For example, in

reference to the influence of economic development on renewable energy, the economic factor

might not incite change in the state unless the state is experiencing an environment of job loss

(Weiner & Koontz, 2010). Path-dependency offers an explanation of how the historical

decisions, institutional structures, political environment, etc. reinforce a particular policy path

through positive feedback mechanisms (Laird & Stefes, 2009). However, the path’s beginning is

dependent on an impetus (e.g., crisis or policy window) that creates the pressure for change in

conjunction with a viable solution and advocates that are powerful enough to influence a new

policy’s direction (Laird & Stefes, 2009).

Organizational Change Theory

“There is nothing more permanent than change.” –Heraclitus

Organizational-change management presents an option for structuring the self-reinforcing

dynamics of path-dependent theories in application to the adoption of renewable energy on a

local level. Practices in organizational-change management often focus on how organizations


meet the needs of dramatically changing circumstances in terms of strategies, structures,

systems, boundaries, expectations, etc. (Cameron & Green, 2015). Authors in the field often

illustrate the need for practiced and proven methodologies for organizational change in direct

relation to the “intense” rate at which the contemporary world changes through “boundary-

pushing” scientific inventions, the “economics of globalization,” so on and so forth (p.1). In

general it can provide a framework for “why change happens, how change happens, and what

needs to be done to make change a more welcoming concept” in an era of tremendous pressure

to perform (p. 2).

Change in organizations is difficult because humans do not like change. Although we

grasp that change is necessary, we often hang on to what we value. However, human change is

the impetus for organizational change (Carnevale, 2003). Humans often maintain deeply held

beliefs that “blind” them to the need for change (p. 40). Humans’ awareness is a self-reinforcing

“seamless circuit” that makes them “feel right even when it reflects only a partial and often

distorted view of existence” (p. 40). In most organizational cultures, being wrong is shamed;

therefore, risk of this potential is resisted, further encapsulating the process and discouraging

change (p. 42). However, sometimes change requires “refusing to deny the truth and making

necessary changes even though there is no guarantee they will work” (p. 46). Organizational

change is not organizational dissolution of what works. Instead it is acknowledging what is good

while striving to be better.

“‘Knowledge is power’ is a popular idea. The truth is that knowledge is power when

power lets it be that way.” (Carnelvale, 2003, p. 64)


Organizational-change theories often claim that organizations do not learn, nor do they

change, unless individuals do so (Carnevale, 2003, p. 63). However, there is often one serious

impediment to translating this human capital to the institutional process, and that is authority (p.

64). Overcoming the hierarchical, bureaucratic ideal conceptualization of knowledge is vitally

important to the transformation of an organization, and it is especially challenging in

governmental entities. For the historical period of industrialization in the twentieth century, when

quality of life rapidly improved, organizations were expected to mass-produce goods for the

lowest possible price, and government was expected to provide services to increase standards of

living; therefore, a precedence for standardized processes became important (pp. 64-65).

However, organizational-change theory assumes that this trend has ended and reform is

paramount for successful organizations.

The former trend of scientific management created a divide between conception and

execution in work. The manifestation led to a separation of physical and mental aspects of work,

a loss of control, and ultimately a disassociation between what is being done and the end result.

General attempts at change often occur in the single loops by which the action changes but the

factors, or governing variables, of the situation remain the same (p. 67). This situation is what

often occurs when individuals invest in outside training but do not follow up by iterating the

lessons to the rest of the organization (pp. 68-69).

Organizational-change theory has historically been integrated into actions for creating

high-performing organizations through actions focused increasingly on human capital. However,

organizational-change management has often been utilized for paradigm shifts and for the

overcoming of self-reinforcing dynamics, in order to change a historically well-established

process. These lessons lend a structure for addressing similar issues being tackled by the shift in


the energy-production sector. Established operating procedures for conventional sources of

energy do not necessarily fit in the new era of renewable energy, and organizational-change

theories offer a creative process that could be useful and even necessary for moving

municipalities onto the path of pursuing renewable-energy production.

John P. Kotter’s Methodology

There are a multitude of models, techniques, and processes for addressing organizational

change; however, one method appears to parallel the self-reinforcing aspects of path-dependence

models. John Kotter is a Harvard professor and best-selling author who has established a practice

in motivating people in business management to lead better organizations “in an era of

increasingly rapid change” (“John Kotter,” n.d.). A tenet of Kotter’s work is that organizations

that do not evolve will perish; therefore, Kotter’s methodology, developed over decades in

observation of hundreds of organizations, outlines a process of concurrent and continuous steps

(or factors) that combine for organizations to successfully transform. Figure 3 illustrates the

cycle.

Kotter (2012) emphasizes that in the turbulent world of today, organizations make

predictable mistakes in “the adoption of new technologies, major strategic shifts,” etc. (p. xi).

Kotter’s strategy focuses on influencing people’s emotions, a stark contrast from theoretical

approaches to rationale and logic (p. xii). Kotter notes that data gathering and analysis are

important, but the approach moves away from pure analytics into utilizing feelings as a tool for

change. Analytical tools work best when “parameters are known, assumptions are minimal, and

the future is not fuzzy” and are therefore limited (p. 12). Kotter stresses that change is difficult,

but successful large-scale change occurs when individuals are helped to see the truth that

influences feelings (p. 2). Rather than seeing problems as “inevitable and out of our control,”


getting frustrated, and giving up, the process establishes a framework for attainment (pp. 2-3).

Change is often difficult because people have not experienced it done successfully, which breeds

pessimism, fear, and lack of faith (p. 13). However, in the transition away from the industrial

economy, Kotter (2012) argues that organizations must become better (p. 13); doing so involves

seeing the issues and then “steer[ing] clear of the pitfalls” (p. 49).

Figure 3. Illustrates the cyclical and reinforcing nature of Kotter’s 8 Steps to

organizational change.

Detailed descriptions of Kotter’s steps are as follows:

Create Sense of Urgency

Build Guiding Coalitions

Form Strategic Vision &

Initiatives

Communicate for Buy-In

Empower Action

Create

Short-Term Wins

Sustain Acceleration

Institute Change


Step 1 Create a Sense of Urgency. Step one involves crafting and communicating an

opportunity that mitigates fear, anger, and complacency and gets people excited (a feeling) to

institute change. This step can be as simple as relaying how more competition and cost pressures

will require a change to meet new 21st century challenges. The credibility of this urgency can

often come from customers that present a compelling case. Urgency is also hampered by

previous success; in other words, belief that current practices are fine because of working

successfully in the past. However, the urgency must relay that regardless of past success, old

practices might not be appropriate for the future. Sometimes urgency is created through fear,

which causes people to become self-protective (e.g., who cares about the environment?;

renewables are too expensive). In these cases fear is a great step, but it must become positive, or

people will focus on self-preservation.

Step 2 Build A Guiding Coalition. Step two involves assembling a team of people with

the appropriate skills, credibility, and authority to lead and support the proposed change for the

greater good. Once urgency is established, people are more willing to provide leadership, even at

personal risk for no short-term rewards. Rather than allowing political gamesmanship to rule,

trust must be built and honest conflict must occur by allowing different perspectives. This

approach can involve candid conversations with focus and discipline. At this point, the key

players must be involved, or the effort is futile and complacency is bolstered.

Step 3 Form a Strategic Vision and Initiatives. Step three involves the creation of a

sensible, unambiguous, and desired future potential. A common mistake in step three is relying

on plans and budgets to be sufficient or on strategies that are “too slow and cautious for a faster-

moving world” (p. 4). Kotter (2012) asserts that improvements can be made without affecting

current delivery of services, but one cannot plan for a future that is not understood. Therefore,


there must be a vision of what the organization should look like and how those involved feel

about it. The vision “shows an end state where all plans and strategies will eventually take” the

organization (p. 67). The process can be unnerving because it requires “venturing into unknown

territory” and doing things differently from before (p. 69).

Often there is a tension between efficiency and a mixture of innovation and customer

service (p. 70), especially when the change goes against the way a majority, if not all, of the

industry does something (e.g., fossil-fuel energy generation). In the public sector this dilemma

(or tension) sometimes means seeing the greater good, providing essential services to the public,

improving the service, and not funding inefficiencies. Investment is required into a new system

that in the long run will save money. The process has to overcome the sense that negative

scenarios are inevitable and take into account that the old routine will eventually lead to disaster.

Step 4 Communicate for Buy-In. Step four involves communicating the results of step

three to induce understanding and develop commitment in a critical mass of people. At this stage

even the most intelligent people may communicate poorly without realizing it, but at this step

faith must be created in the management. The widespread communication must be clear,

accurate, and credible to address people’s anxieties and anger. Clutter must be removed, so that

the important issues are addressed. Cynicism must be stopped by “walking the talk,” or closing

the gap between words and deeds.

Step 5 Empower Action. Step five involves the removal of physical, institutional, and

psychological barriers that often undermine transformational efforts. Those involved have to be

empowered to “rise to the occasion” and approach an issue in a new way (p. 9). Once people are

aware that change is necessary, and that others have survived change, they are often converted

from obstacles to active helpers. However, sincere empowerment is crucial, because people tend


to internalize incapability of change “after years of stability, incremental change, or failed

attempts” (p. 110). In this stage, information is power, and lack of information disempowers (p.

114).

In the public sector, the bureaucratic over-devotion to performance evaluation

disempowers actors because it is an old system that rewards previous goals, rather than

evaluating innovation and new ideas (p. 106). Evaluation of change is more than just return on

investment. It is comparable to a life-cycle analysis of fossil-fuel electrical generation; change

evaluation must take in all factors that contribute to the change, not merely money spent and

money made. At this point, obstacles can seem insurmountable and overwhelming; however, the

change movement must acknowledge that not everything can be done at once. Issues must be

viewed with pragmatism and focus, leading to step six.

Step 6 Create Short-Term Wins. Step six involves sinking the opposition’s cynics and

skeptics by providing credibility to the efforts and establishing momentum. In the public sector

this approach can often involve reducing bureaucratic red tape and gaining the support of

important political partners, as well as rewarding the hard workers. The wins have to be

unambiguous, visible, and quick to provide validity to the cause. By management’s building faith

in the process, power is taken from cynics and more individuals are drawn to the change (p. 125).

Rather than attempting to tackle everything at once, a few, or only simple, tasks (e.g., low-

hanging fruit) are attempted to create an energy with a sense of optimism and accomplishment.

The initial wins often reiterate and eventually lead to subsequently more substantial wins. In this

step, it is important that success never be “hoopla,” or propaganda, because then skepticism

grows and credibility falters (pp. 136-138), especially in the public sector.


Step 7 Sustain Acceleration. Step seven involves consolidating successes along with

continuing to tackle more and more waves of change. The momentum of previous wins is

intended to grow, urgency is maintained, and false pride is diminished by avoiding premature

declarations of victory. It is generally helpful in this step to focus on addressing an external

problem (e.g., climate change) instead of continuously beating up on those involved in the

organization. Power must be attained at this point for management (or the organization) to begin

addressing the larger-scale problem (i.e., no longer the low-hanging fruit) without becoming

complacent or overwhelmed. At times this strategy includes questioning the status quo, not

serving a “conservative charter” that states not to “stir the waters too much; be practical” (p.

149). Once these issues are overcome, the “wall start[s] to fall,” like a row of dominoes until the

change makes it to the end goal (p. 150). These adjustments are often proactive, enabling the

organization to “anticipate the issue rather than suddenly finding it explode” in their face (p.

152).

Step 8 Institute Change. Step eight involves nurturing the changes by establishing

connections to the organization to ensure the continuation. In Kotter’s (2012) words:

Tradition is a powerful force. Leaps into the future can slide back into the past.

We keep a change in place by helping to create a new, supportive, and sufficiently

strong organizational culture. A supportive culture provides roots for the new

ways of operating. It keeps the revolutionary technology, the globalized

organization, the innovative strategy, or the more efficient processes working to

make you a winner (p.159).

The changes have to be embedded into how the organization runs, the vision must be linked to

all actions, and actors in the organization must share in the vision. Often the rewarding, or

promoting, of individuals who are absorbed in the change creates “an increasingly solid and

stable foundation” (p. 171).


Kotter (2012) emphasizes the organizational-change process is not rigid, but rather just as

the world has overlapping cycles of change, so do organizations. Kotter argues that change is

about the behavior of people, and it often fails when people are “ignoring how the world is

changing” and are “frozen in terror by the problems they see, or … do little but bitterly

complain,” a phenomenon all too relevant to the issue of transitioning to renewable energy (p.7).

However, when done right, these eight steps create a self-reinforcing dynamic for change in an

organization. Kotter’s research shows that in the turbulent 21st century, “winning organizations”

follow this process of “adaptation and transformation” (p. 177).


CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY

The situations revolving around the adoption of renewable energy are complex and

convoluted. Comparative approaches in past research on policy issues regarding adoption of

renewable energy have often taken a high-level approach (e.g., comparing nations and

international differences); or have been approached in a singular fashion (i.e., from a cultural,

political, economic, or institutional perspective). Therefore, there is a much smaller body of

comparative, path-dependent work focused on the municipal level of renewable-energy adoption.

Moreover, research on the adoption of renewable energy has often taken a highly

theoretical, and often political, approach (as exhibited by the different comparative schools).

However, there is a large body of work in organizational-change management that offers

comprehensive insight on how organizations redirect, restructure, reorganize, et cetera in a

pragmatic manner. The procedures required in transitioning from conventional, fossil-fuel

produced energy to the adoption of renewable energy seemingly parallel the organizational-

change processes.

This project is practical, in an attempt to survey and compare a wide breadth of variables

in the adoption of renewable energy between two Colorado municipalities (Aspen and Fort

Morgan). The research will be conducted in a comparative approach of most-different systems in

order to explore and contrast the cases and show a robustness for the particular relationship

between the variables in the processes. The research will synthesize the theoretical approach of

historical self-reinforcing dynamics of path-dependence with the elements of Kotter’s 8-step path

to successful organizational change. The research will demonstrate whether the synthesizing of

the theories is appropriate (i.e., that the factors align); and if so, whether the observed

relationship holds in multiple divergent settings (in both municipalities). Ultimately, the intent of


the synthesis is to pair the logical and rational basis of the theoretical approach with the

humanist, applied foundation of organizational-change theory.

This study utilizes a small comparative case-study approach with the use of public and

private document review, review of a previous synthesis case study, passive and active

observation, and personal communication. While most comparative research incorporates

quantitative measures, the current research does not. However, the research incorporates multiple

sources (i.e., triangulation of data) in the integration of theoretical perspectives from two distinct

backgrounds (comparative politics and change management). The qualitative case study will

include an initial review and analysis of appropriate cultural (e.g., public opinion), political (e.g.,

political partisanship), economic (e.g., affluence), and institutional (e.g., policies) factors of the

chosen municipalities. Because of time and resource constraints, all dimensions of each

perspective with not be analyzed. There will also be a review of local geographic location,

historic municipal demographic data, and contemporary municipal utility data. The case study

will also incorporate personal communication with actors involved in the municipalities and with

organizations associated with the pursuit of renewable energy by both entities. Specifically:

David Hornbacher, the Director of Utilities and Environmental Initiatives, and Ashley Perl, the

Climate Action Manager, for the City of Aspen; and Brent Nation, the Director of Water

Resources and Utilities, and Jeff Wells, City Manager for the City of Fort Morgan.

The intention is to develop a detailed understanding of whether comparative, path-

dependent factors in the adoption of renewable energy, in two Colorado municipalities that own

the energy utilities, can be paralleled to the processes of organizational-change management,

considering that both processes are iterative and self-reinforcing. The results could generate a


theoretical and pragmatic approach for the pursuit of renewable energy sources on a community

and local municipal governmental level.

I performed all data collection, analysis, and interpretation acting as the primary

instrument for data collection; therefore, there is no need for interrater-reliability checking. It is

important to note that I work within one of the municipal organizations and that therefore this

position could affect the responses provided during personal communication or during

observations. Specifically, underlying assumptions of my perspective may lead individuals to

skew responses in a perceived favorable manner. Such a researcher must remain aware of

potential bias and seek to avoid it.


CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

Municipal Governments and Sustainability

According to the International City County Management Association (2016), in a survey

of over 1,800 local governments, 32% have adopted a sustainability plan. With a focus on

sustainability, a super-majority of the goals address strategies related to economic development,

with other priorities including energy conservation and disaster mitigation. Only 47% of the

entities identified environmental protection as a priority, with a much larger body (91%)

identifying economic development. The governments identified the following as either

significant or very significant factors in the adoption of sustainability plans:

Fiscal savings (84%)

Leaderships of local elected officials (82%)

Federal or state funding opportunities (75%)

Potential to attract development (71%)

Concern over the environment (68%)

The research also identifies the following as the factors hindering the efforts:

Lack of funding (88%)

State or federal funding restrictions (61%)

Lack of staff capacity/support (59%)

Lack of information on how to proceed (51%)

Lack of community/resident support (49%)

Opposition of elected officials (49%)


Rather than pursuing the adoption of renewable energy the local governments conducted

energy audits (63%) and improved lighting efficiency (64%), heating and air conditioning

systems (49%), exterior lighting (e.g., streetlights) (45%), and traffic signal efficiency (35%).

While some of the efforts are promising, only 19% of respondents had “dedicated budget

resources specifically to sustainability or environmental protection” (ICMA, 2016). Additionally,

only nine percent had dedicated staff in multiple departments; another nine percent had dedicated

staff in only one department, and only six percent had the dedicated staff in “the chief elected or

chief appointed” offices (ICMA, 2016). The lack of staffing and proactive policies does not align

with the 76% of the entities that had faced major weather disasters (e.g., 53% dealt with a flood,

51% with a blizzard, and 24% with a hurricane) that are often associated with climate change

and the effects of GHG emissions from fossil-fuel energy generation.

The results indicate a large number of U.S. municipalities are not actively seeking

remedies to the problems associated with climate change, particularly not for reasons of

environmental protection or through actions such as renewable-energy generation. According to

Fischlein, Smith, and Wilson (2009), municipalities “hold a unique set of organizational

challenges” because of the size, resource access, and complex ownership models; however, the

presence in all 50 U.S. states (and therefore, a large share of the generation) marks the

importance of municipal generators for climate change and renewable-energy adoption issues.

Considering the wide breadth of hurdles that municipalities must overcome to proceed in

renewable energy adoption, it seems a miracle that any have.


Synthesis of Comparative Theory and Organizational Change

There are countless examples of research that synthesizes separate theories to explain

outcomes, or intended outcomes. For example, Sovacool and Dworkin (2014) demonstrate the

need for change in the approach to global energy justice through a synthesized framework of

diverse philosophical theories on justice from Rawls to Friedman. The authors describe the

current conventional system as iterative, “something very close to addiction,” by which self-

replicating policies are locked in and create a dependency that justifies “expenditures to operate,

maintain, and improve” the current system (p. 272). For example, subsidies that “promote energy

inefficiency” increase the barriers to emerging technologies (p. 266). Sovacool and Dworkin

(2014) state that only “comprehensive solutions implemented holistically and simultaneously”

can successfully address the issues of equitably sharing both the benefits and burdens of energy

production and consumption (i.e., energy injustice) (p. 362). Additionally, the social, political,

and economic factors are just as important as the technology in overcoming the “barriers,

obstacles, and impediments” to energy justice (p. 362). While the authors demonstrate the need

for energy justice (a component of which is sustainability), little research has been done

specifically on synthesis of comparative political theories and organizational change, and almost

none on the specific outcome of municipal adoption of renewable energy.

British Columbia Hydro Case Study

Scodanibbio (2011) documented how steps of organizational-change management were

incorporated into a policy window that led to the emergence of British Columbia (BC) Hydro’s

(the third-largest electricity utility in Canada) Water Use Planning (WUP) program. The research

suggests that with the threat of ecological collapse, due to extensive consumerism, a shift in the

dominant paradigm might be the solution to the problems that scientists, politicians, and the


public are realizing. Responses to environmental degradation are “largely inadequate, with too

little being done, too slowly and often too late” (Scodanibbio, 2011, p. 1006). Therefore, the

research sought to identify the “processes influencing policy change, aimed towards the adoption

of more sustainable behaviours” (p. 1007). The article explores historical contexts to recognize

the scenarios in which “business as usual,” or the status quo, shifted.

Historically, BC Hydro’s mission was to “produce abundant, inexpensive power” through

a period of minimal governmental regulation, in an attempt to expand economic growth during

the 20th

century (p. 1007). However, the company’s tactics included forcible resettlements of

communities, leading to a growing resistance to the company. As the environmental movement

advanced and ecological concerns related to fish populations emerged, interest groups began

opposing BC Hydro’s practices and facilities. In 1989, Canadians’ concern for the environment

reached a notable peak, and public opinion shifted from viewing Hydro’s policies as

economically prosperous to growing distrust and desire for governmental regulation (p. 1008). In

1991, motivated by a surge of environmental concerns, the New Democratic Party entered the

governmental sphere after years of a “pro-industry” government (p. 1008). The office established

a number of pro-environmental regulations (e.g., protection of lands and marine areas), as well as

a Commission on Resources and Environment (CORE). Through a multi-stakeholder and

consensus-based approach to decision making, the office began to acknowledge environmental

groups that had previously been “marginalized by core policy processes” (p. 1008). Essentially,

stakeholders were given authority through the institutionalization of the environmental concerns.

During the time period, several events occurred in which fish habitats, a symbol of

British Columbia’s identity, were damaged by the operation of BC Hydro’s dams on several

streams. As problems grew, so did the public’s concerns, outcry, and media attention. As


external problems grew, internal problems followed. BC Hydro lacked clarity on how to regulate

because of the “complex institutional and jurisdictional arrangement for managing water and

natural resources in Canada,” reminiscent of the electric sector in the United States (p. 1009).

With increasing regulations (e.g., flow constraints) BC Hydro could not meet the required level

of power production, and costly legal actions were worsening the situation; licensing issues

provided minimal parameters for the issues at hand (p. 1009). A commissioned report on

compliance illustrated the necessity of revising the company’s licenses for both BC Hydro’s and

the government’s sake (p. 1009).

The increased participation of concerned interest groups reached a tipping point when the

government came under attack for not enforcing environmental legislation against BC Hydro.

BC Hydro realized that customer expectations had shifted and the company was no longer “being

a good corporate citizen” (p. 1010). The company understood that the days of ecological

destruction for economic progress had passed, and that as “society’s relations with the

environment changed,” the company’s would have to evolve as well (p. 1010). The company

hired “innovative and enlightened individuals” that became champions of the environmentally

conscious strategic plans, advocating the case to convince the leadership positions to transform

the company (p. 1010). In the attempts to economically justify a change in strategy, the inability

to estimate costs of inaction (i.e., increasing regulation and loss of autonomy) led BC Hydro to

realize that proactive action was more cost-effective (p. 1010). The eventual collaboration of the

company and governmental agencies led to reviews of current practices and generation of

different approaches.

However, in 1995, BC Hydro applied to expand generation at a plant. With pressure from

interest groups, the government approved BC Hydro to proceed as long as an “operating plan”


was incorporated in the study of the facility’s expansion (p. 1011). The operating plan, later

named the Water Use Plan (WUP), was agreed upon by a wide variety of stakeholders (e.g., local

and national governments, and the company) through a collaborative decision-making process

that led to “mutually acceptable solutions” (p. 1011). With a wide breadth of Hydro’s facilities

facing similar pressures from the government, the WUP solution for the current expansion was

mandated for all facilities, leading to the institutionalization of the change in operating the

facilities.

Policy Window. Scodanibbio’s (2011) historical analysis process was a synthesis of

Kingdon’s (1984) Multiple Streams Framework and Lober’s (1997) Collaboration Forming

Model. Kingdon’s (1984) Multiple Streams consists of: an identified problem, a policy (i.e., the

solution), and the political climate. Upon intersection, the streams create what is known as a

policy window in which a shift or policy change occurs. Scodanibbio’s (2011) approach also

incorporates Lober’s (1997) contribution of the organizational stream, in which an organization

outside government (i.e., private sector) develops new considerations and seeks to improve

“corporate behavior” (p. 1007).

Scodannibbio (2011) found that when the dam’s problem was linked to a plausible policy

solution during a window of opportunity (social, political, and economic context) the

organization’s changing corporate behaviors produced the program. Ultimately, a “more

progressive government, the growth of the environmental movement, and new approaches [i.e.,

solutions]” to complex resource decisions provided for the adoption of the program (p. 1006).

The steps towards adoption included:

1. Creating short-term wins through successful pilot projects (i.e., the first WUP for the

initial expansion request),


2. Developing buy-in through guiding coalitions (i.e., the interest groups),

3. Institutionalizing the change and providing financial resources to compensate for

foregone power (i.e., the establishment of WUP for all facilities and a governmental fund

to cover losses),

4. Forming a strategic vision through visionary leaders (i.e., new hires at BC Hydro),

5. And creating urgency by establishing an immediate need for a solution (given British

Columbia’s extensive reliance on hydro-facilities for power and the conflict with flow

constraints).

Figure 4. Illustrates Scodanibbio’s (2011) synthesis of historical contexts leading to a policy

window and the organizational-change factors (e.g., urgency and vision) that created an

institutionalized response (i.e., the creation of the WUP) (p. 1013).

Ultimately, Scodanibbio (2011) found that change occurs through the participation of

“visionary leaders that champion issues; resources; […] financial incentives […]; and lastly, an


element of chance,” i.e., “the opening of a policy window, or the grasping of the opportunity

provided by it” (p. 1013). Although the BC Hydro case is an attempt to address the ecological

damage to waterways and animal habitats, the issue at hand is similar to that of the proposed

study: an issue arises, old operating procedures offer no solution, new options for addressing the

issues become available, and processes that reinforce a change in paradigm are instituted.

The intent of this synthesis is to combine the pure research aspect of comparative theories

with the applied characteristic of organizational-change theory. Essentially, a case study audit of

successful change operations will be delineated to generate a problem-solving change process

that can be utilized to understand how change in renewable-energy adoption has occurred, as

well as how organizations can engender the success of the change in the future.

Aspen, Colorado

Community Demographics

The City of Aspen serves as the county seat of Pitkin County, located about 160 miles

southwest of Denver. As of the 2010 U.S. Census, Pitkin County had a population of over 16,000

people and is continuously growing (“Pitkin County: At a Glance,” n.d.). Aspen is the first city

is the state of Colorado (and third in the country) to run on 100% renewable energy (Robbie,

2015).

Cultural.

Within Aspen’s City Council priority list is a set of guidelines. One of these guidelines

reads to “Make decisions based on 30-year vision” (“Top Ten Goals,” n.d.). Additionally, as a

fairly geographically secluded municipality the City has always been interested in locally owned

and operated energy-generation facilities; most pointedly, for the co-benefits of a local back-up

power option (energy security) and environmental benefit.


Political. The city of Apsen, and Pitkin County, have historically voted for and elected

Democratic legislators. (“Pitkin County Elections,” n.d.). The five County Commissioners (Patti

Clapper, Rachel Richards, Michael Owsley, Steve Child, and George Newman) all won on

Democratic tickets. The City of Aspen’s City Council (Steve Skadron, Adam Frisch, Art Daily,

Ann Mullins, and Bert Myrin) is also elected but in a non-partisan election. However, the State

legislators of Aspen fall in Colorado House District 61, which is currently being served by

Democrat Millie Hamner, and was previously served by Democrat Christine Scanlan. Aspen also

falls in Senate District 5, which is currently being served by Democrat Kerry Donovan (2015-),

who was preceded by Democrat Gail Schwartz (2007-2015). Therefore, an educated guess would

suggest that a Council elected by a similar constituency would reflect similar values.

Economic. Aspen’s median household income is higher than the state’s ($66,635 and

$59,448, respectively). Pitkin County has a per-capita income of $64,381, making it the fourth-

highest of all counties in the United States, and the cost of living index is extremely high

(192.61). (“Pitkin County: At a Glance,” n.d.; Aspen City, 2016). With year-round arts, cultural,

and recreational events, tourism is the anchor of the local economy. Ninety-six percent of the

population has a high school education, with almost 60% having a college education.

Institutional. In 2007, Aspen’s City Council adopted the Canary Action Plan. This plan

serves as the community’s RPS and commits Aspen to reducing emissions “30% by 2020 and

80% by 2050, below 2000 levels” (“Canary Initiative,” n.d.). In addition to the Canary Initiative,

the City of Aspen hosts several other green initiatives such as the Aspen ZGreen (a program that

offers resources to citizens and visitors to reduce their environmental impact), a recycling

program (that promotes recycling as well as waste reduction), and a utility-efficiency program

(that offers rebates, incentives, information, and energy audits); these programs and initiatives


were made possible by a Council that dedicated funding to the appropriate resources. The

Council recounted the longstanding commitment of the community to protect the environment

and supported progressive policies because of the threat that global warming poses to the quality

of life in Aspen, as well as the global community. Additionally, several of the current City

Council’s Top 10 Priorities are environmentally focused (“Top Ten Goals,” n.d.).

Municipal Energy

The City of Aspen has been a member of the Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska’s

(MEAN) power pool since 1982 and began receiving power in 1984. Previously Aspen had met

its electricity demand through locally owned hydroelectric facilities (Ruedi and Maroon Creek)

and purchased its additional power from a private company (now Xcel Energy) and Western

Area Power Administration (WAPA) (P. Overeynder, personal communication, August 23,

2016).

Renewable Energy Adoption. Aspen, Colorado has historically been in support of

renewable energy production, with a significant portion (75%) of the City’s capacity being met

by hydro-generation and wind contracts prior to the pursuit of 100% renewable energy initiative.

However, in the 1990s the City Council established a goal of reaching 100% renewable

electricity for the city-owned utility by 2015. At that time, the goal was not institutionalized, but

was rather a vision that the City Council desired for the long-term benefit of the community.

The Council directive in the 1990s led to the establishment in 2005 of the Canary

Initiative as an arm of the City’s Environmental Health department and to five new job positions.

The local economy was mildly affected by the Great Recession in the 2000s; however, it was the

environmentally minded community that led to the renewable energy pursuits. The Canary

Initiative was aptly named, as Aspen, a “High alpine mountain town,” sees “the effects of


climate change before many other places,” making it the canary of the mineshaft “for global

climate impacts” (“About Us,” n.d.). This department then created the Climate Action Plan,

which was adopted by the City Council in 2007, which created written documentation on the

community’s dedication to climate action.

With the Council’s direction to reach 100% renewables, internal staff drafted potential

projects that could contribute to the City’s capacity level. Two of these potential facilities were

the Castle Creek Energy Center and the Ridgway Reservoir. In 2012, the City decided to actively

pursue the first of these facilities, as it was locally sited. However, as the City began work on the

initiative, interest groups in opposition to the facility became vocal. In order to mitigate the

concerns of local citizens, the City funded third-party investigations that found that the facility

would not have a negative effect on the stream. However, a mass media campaign with extensive

funding (including the Koch brothers) began dominating the conversation. After a year of the

campaign the Council decided to ask the public for an advisory vote on whether to proceed with

the project (Best, 2013). When the results came back 51 to 49 against, the Council did not vote to

establish the facility.

Although the local facility was seemingly defeated, for the time, the City still maintained

its determination to reach 100% renewables by 2015. Therefore, staff began to pursue the second

facility at Ridgway Reservoir. Without the opposition of interest groups, with the economic

feasibility of the project, and with the dedication of Council and staff, Aspen worked with the

Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association to have the facility built and receive half of

the power produced, with the opportunity to purchase more or even own the facility in the future.

The facility also produced several regional jobs.


With an impending deadline, Aspen began pursuing power-purchase agreements with its

current provider, MEAN, to make up the difference. Again, Aspen had a history of pursuing

renewable energy, which in the case of MEAN had meant previous negotiations for a larger

share of the power pool’s hydro-electricity from Western Area Power Administration (WAPA).

However, by this time the City had maximized the allocation available from WAPA. Therefore,

staff had to persuade MEAN’s membership (60+ individuals) to invest in wind-generation

facilities, when a majority of their portfolio and investments were in coal-fired infrastructure.

Aspen’s staff worked diligently to arrange terms with MEAN that allow the City to produce and

purchase over half (53.4%) of the annual electricity locally; this figure does not include the

additional 2% allowed for behind the meter.

In 2015, Aspen reached its vision of 100% renewable energy (46% hydroelectric, 53%

wind power, 1% landfill gas) through a series of power-purchase agreements with MEAN. The

City continues to advocate for the transition with messages like the following:

The City of Aspen strives to be an environmental leader and to promote

environmental stewardship throughout the Roaring Fork Valley, across the state

of Colorado, and around the globe. We recognize Aspen’s dependence on climate

and natural resources for a thriving economy, healthy ecosystems and exceptional

quality of life (“Current Projects & Programs,” n.d.).

During the first year of 100% renewable energy adoption, Aspen saw a total increase of

only $215,000 in energy costs. None of these costs led to an increase in customer rates, and

Aspen still maintains the sixth-lowest rates in the state.


In addition to continuing marketing for the Climate Action Plan and running the

previously mentioned sustainability programs, the City through the Canary Action Team has also

institutionalized inventories to measure progress of the initiatives. For example, a community

greenhouse-gas emissions inventory is updated every three years to track progress from the 2004

baseline, to the 2020 goal, and on. Additionally, the City has established internal emissions

mandates (2% reductions a year), and tracks the progress through a separate system; between

2004 and 2014 it reached a reduction of 42%, 12% more than the target. The City also sustains

an internal “Green Team” that engages employees in events and educational opportunities

centered on environmental topics. The City is also a member of the Mountain Pact, “a group of

mountain communities working together to address the impact of climate change,” and supports

the Citizens’ Climate Lobby, which aims to “create the political will for climate solutions by

enabling individual breakthroughs in the exercise of personal and political power” (“Current

Projects & Programs,” n.d; Citizens’ Climate Lobby, n.d.). The Canary Initiative is also a

member of the Roaring Fork Climate Alliance with local non-profits that work together on

climate issues. Lastly, in 2016 the City released the first Sustainability Report, comprehensively

outlining the City’s progress, and invited dialogue on sustainability matters for the community

(“Sustainability report,” n.d.).

In summation, the affluent City of Aspen transitioned to 100% renewable energy sources

by 2015 through a series of institutional mechanisms established by a City Council with a

dedicated vision for the long-term sustainability of the community and collective stewardship for

the global economy. Short-term wins were established through successful negotiations with

MEAN and the City, and with a large liberal constituency and political makeup, organized and

funded a department that implemented policies (RPS) and programs (incentives) that pursued


renewable energy sources regardless of opposition from well-positioned interest groups and

fluctuations in the economy (A. Perl, personal communication, August 17, 2016).

Fort Morgan, Colorado

Community Demographics

The City of Fort Morgan serves as the county seat of Morgan County, located about 80

miles northeast of Denver. Morgan County’s population grew rapidly in the ‘90s but has

plateaued around 28,000 since 2010 (“Morgan County,” 2016). The population is projected to

grow steadily in the next 15 years, with in-migration of young families, and retention of residents

over 70 years of age. However, this growth will be heavily dependent on services provided by

the County and City.

Cultural. Around 52% of the population identifies as white or Caucasian, 40% identify

as Hispanic or Latino, and 5.6% identifying as either black or African American (Connect Fort

Morgan, Comprehensive Plan). This unique mixture of cultures is generally an effect of the

employment options provided by local industries, including Cargill’s meat packing plant. With

26 different languages and dialects spoken in the local school district, Fort Morgan is the most

diverse city in the state of Colorado (Dodge, 2015).

Political. The partisanship of local legislators is as to be expected for a small, rural

community. All three of Morgan County’s commissioners, Brian McCracken, Laura Teague, and

Jim Zwetzig, are Republicans. Additionally, although the City Council elections are non-

partisan, my experience with former (Terry McAlister, Brent Nation, Joe Segura Jr, Debra

Forstedt, and Scoot Bryan) and current (Ron Shaver, Lisa Northrup, Christine Castoe, Dan


Marler, Kevin Lindell, and Clint Anderson) Council members has led to me to infer that a

majority, if not all, of these legislators also have a conservative political leaning.

In terms of State legislators, Fort Morgan falls in Colorado House District 65, which is

currently served by Republican John Becker, and was previously served by Republican Jerry

Sonnenberg and Republican Diane Hoppe before that. Fort Morgan also falls in Colorado Senate

District 1, which is currently served by Republican Jerry Sonnenberg, who was preceded by both

Republican Greg Brophy and Mark Hillman before that.

Economic. The County’s median household income is $46,223, which is significantly

lower than the State’s ($59,448). This difference is mainly due to the lower wages associated

with “agriculture and government jobs, alongside fewer higher wage professional service jobs”

(“Morgan County,” 2016). Additionally, the cost of living is lower than the State’s (94.92 and

100, respectively). The aging population is set to “put downward pressure on local government

tax revenue due to changes in spending on taxable goods” (“Morgan County,” 2016).

While the Great Recession did not heavily affect the County, since 2011 the expanding

workforce has come mainly from construction, agriculture, manufacturing, and mining. The base

industries in the County consist mainly of agriculture and producing of animals and animal

products. In 2015, the average weekly wage in the County was 26% lower than the statewide

average ($767 and $1,042, respectively). More than a quarter (26%) of the population holds less

than a high school education, almost one third (32%) are high school graduates, with about 7%

holding bachelor’s degrees (Connect Fort Morgan, Comprehensive Plan).

Institutional. The City of Fort Morgan does not currently have, nor has it in its traceable

history had, institutional mechanisms that promote the adoption of renewable energy. The City

has never implemented an RPS, nor has it created programs that incentivize either renewable


energy (e.g., favorable rate structures) or energy conservation (e.g., lightbulb exchange

programs). Additionally, the City Council has never prioritized, nor budgeted for, increased

funding for issues surrounding renewable electricity generation or sustainability. Lastly, I am the

only member of the City’s leadership team that is interested in a renewable-energy production

facility for environmental reasons.

Municipal Energy Provider

The City of Fort Morgan has been a member of the Municipal Energy Agency of

Nebraska’s (MEAN) power pool since the early 1980s in a series of long-term power-purchase

agreements. Previous to that, records lead the City Attorney to conclude that the City was in a

series of short-term power-supply agreements with other Nebraska-based power pools since the

closing of Fort Morgan’s power plant in the early 1950s (J. Meyers, personal communication,

August 12, 2016).

Failed Hydropower Facility. Beginning in 2010, a single member of the Fort Morgan

City Council, Jim Powers, was avidly recommending that city staff pursue a hydro-electric

power-generating facility on a pressure-reducing vault on the pipeline that supplies the City its

water supply. Jim Powers was known to be a “hardcore Republican,” and his motivation was

two-fold. First, the City’s water-treatment plant was outside of the city limits, and the power

supply was coming from the local rural electric association (REA). The prices for the electric

supply were much higher than those of the City; therefore, Jim hoped that during negotiations of

the facility, the energy produced could be utilized to offset the electrical costs for the City’s

plant. Secondly, Jim was privy to the large financial paybacks that hydro-power facilities

contributed to previous projects on the same pipeline (owned by Northern Water).


Jim’s reasoning did not imply pursuit for environmental reasons, but rather economic

reasons. However, his history of community involvement has always expressed a long-term

planning perspective. After continuous remarks by him, city staff began discussions with

Northern Water, the owner of the pipeline, for a feasibility report on a hydro-facility. The

requirement to work in conjunction with both Northern Water and the local REA created a

serious of institutional blocks to the process. At that time, the City had not established an RPS in

any form, nor did it offer incentive programs or directives to pursue sustainability. In meetings

between city staff and the REA, short-term opportunities were presented by the City Manager of

the time, including selling the City’s electric utility in its entirety to the REA for a quick profit.

The lack of a coalition pursuing the objective, or considering the long-term sustainability of the

system, continued to create obstacles to the pursuit of the facility. There were neither community

groups nor staff members advocating for the construction of the facility.

The City’s economy was generally unaffected, either positively or negatively, by the

Great Recession, because of its heavy dependence on agriculture and industry; therefore, the

migrant workforce was relatively unchanged, maintaining the City’s historically lower

socioeconomic status. In the time of uncertain economic environments, the Council retained a

very conservative approach to budgeting capital projects and shied away from projects that were

not articulated as necessary. This stance led Northern Water to fund the feasibility study with no

contributions from either the City or the REA. Additionally, the Council maintained the City’s

level of dependence and self-sufficiency, with little interest in the impacts of other entities.

Completed in 2012, the feasibility study recommended that the facility, which would not create

new jobs, be postponed till the power-purchase rate of the energy produced increased about one

cent in order for the facility’s revenues to substantiate the costs of construction. After


presentation of the findings, the study remained filed amongst the Director of Utilities’ files,

until research for this project began.

In summation, a fiscally conservative Council gave little direction (i.e., only one council

member had genuine interest), or dedication of funding, to pursuing the proposed hydro-facility.

The facility, which would have limited effects on the local stagnant economy, lacked interest

groups supporting the cause; with no sense of urgency or vision for what the project could do for

the community, steps to implement change were not pursued.

Current Renewable Energy Project. In 2012, a private developer, Joe, approached the

County Commissioners about deploying a waste-to-energy facility in Morgan County. The

facility would require waste contracts with Morgan County as well as Washington and Logan

counties. Joe had decided upon Morgan County because of the publicly owned landfill. As a

public body, the County does not run a profit on the landfill and was therefore more amenable to

lowering the load of waste received; in contrast to a private business’ incentive to take in as

much waste as possible to increase profits. After a few initial meetings, the commissioners of the

counties involved recognized the fiscal savings and benefits of the project to the local

community, e.g., reduction of waste extending the useful life of the landfill without further costs

for mitigation of regulated emissions or increasing capacity. At this time the County invited city

officials (notably the City Manager) to begin attending discussions of the project. Initially, the

County invited staff, believing that the City could operate the facility to contribute to its

electrical load; the County was unaware that the City had purchased power rather than producing

it locally.

Upon receiving more information about the potential project, the City Manager became

more interested in the opportunity to offset costs with MEAN, the City’s power provider. During


MEAN committee meetings, the City Manager began proposing the project. In 2013, the project

was officially proposed to the membership of MEAN; however, it was quickly defeated by

directives by MEAN’s Executive Director (ED) of the time. The ED had previous issues with

Fort Morgan’s City Manager that led to a political fall-out between the two. Therefore, the ED

had the proposal reviewed unfavorably to the power-supply committee, the body responsible for

reviewing potential production facilities in the power pool.

With the promise of a Morgan County location dwindling from increasing regulatory

issues with MEAN, Joe began pursuing other locations for the facility. With visionary leadership

and a long-term planning perspective, the City Manager decided to pursue a solution to this

institutional barrier. A Council frustrated by the denial of the project directed the City Manager

to pursue positions of power in MEAN’s governance structure, which the City Manager

successfully attained. Furthermore, City Council had supported the City Manager’s efforts by

budgeting for his attendance at all appropriate committee meetings. The City Manager was

driven by the potential of the facility’s being the “first of its kind” in the United States. Within

the new power positions, the City Manager began questioning the ED’s strategies. Eventually,

the increased accountability created by the City Manager’s actions led MEAN’s ED to retire.

During this same period, Joe had pursued negotiations with another location; however, the

energy producer would be a private organization, and the regulations associated with that project

were just as formidable. During the process the City maintained regular communication with Joe

in regards to the progress being made with MEAN. With the regulations associated with the

other location, the facility again began preparing for a siting in Fort Morgan.

During this time, the City was also experiencing a growing economy, with local

industries increasing employment by the hundreds, and businesses increasing profits due to an


expanding oil and gas industry. While the Council maintained a conservative approach to

budgeting, staff was given more discretion in determining projects to pursue. Again, the City

Manager’s leadership led to investment into several long-term initiatives. Driven by the City

Manager’s long-term perspectives, ongoing media publicity marketing the importance of these

initiatives worked in tandem with the increasing regulations on non-renewable resources (release

of the Clean Power Plan) to persuade the Council to support the City Manager’s vision for the

waste-to-energy facility. Council began advocating for other sustainability practices (e.g., a

recycling program). The proposed facility was also attractive to the City’s practice of

individualism in that it would offer an opportunity for local energy production; in turn,

decreasing the City’s reliability on transmission and production from distant outside entities. The

facility would be local, producing well-paying jobs and would benefit the landfill and sanitation

operations. In the distant future, especially if transmission, natural disaster, or some other factor

leads to the dissipation of a contract with MEAN, the facility could be operated by the City to

increase self-sufficiency.

In addition, the local industrial companies experiencing growth also relayed to the City

that their corporate model was calling for increased “green” initiatives (including potential on-

site generating facilities rather than purchasing from the City). With pressure and a variety of

interest groups forming, the City continued to show support for the project by supporting

MEAN’s investigation into components of the facility, creating buy-in from the Assistant

Director of Wholesale Electric Operations, as well as financial investors for the project.

In summation, the ongoing RE project has progressed with a Council that is culturally

uncomfortable with uncertainty (i.e., trusting professional staff for decision making), retains a

sense of individualism, and plans with a long-term, rather than short-term, perspective. The


population involved in the project has formed several varied interest groups (e.g., local industries

and commissioners from multiple counties) during a time when the economy was growing.

Additionally, the promise of more well-paying jobs seemingly overcame the assumed barrier of

the community’s political orientation as has been seen in previous research; perhaps due to the

pragmatism of the facility rather than strict adherence to ideological values. Lastly, the project

was more strongly supported by internal staff than previous projects, enjoyed dedicated funding,

was supported by Council directives, and led to language in the City’s Comprehensive Plan

advocating for sustainable practices.

The process also exemplified creating a sense of urgency by discussion of increasing

environmental regulations that would affect the local landfill, as well as a desire to be the

location for a “first of its kind” technology in the United States. The County and City built a

guiding coalition that formed a strategic vision and initiatives to pursue the opportunity. The

parties involved maintained ongoing communication to augment buy-in. Action was enabled by

removing institutional barriers within power structures (e.g., MEAN). Short-term wins were

solidified (e.g., by MEAN’s ED’s retiring and by securing landfill contracts from the three

counties necessary). Acceleration has been sustained through visionary leadership of City staff,

dedicated funding, and advocacy from varying interest groups (e.g., local industry, internal staff).

Lastly, the institutionalization of the change, beyond verbiage dedicated to sustainability in the

Comprehensive Plan and signed landfill contracts, will be MEAN’s decision to extend a power-

purchase agreement to the private developer (expected to occur later this year).


CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION

While comparative and organizational-change theories both illustrate factors that create

self-reinforcing dynamics, there has been very little research that attempts to synthesize the

theories in explaining outcomes. Scodanibbio (2011) attempted to do so by synthesizing steps of

organizational change with comparative factors in a policy window. The outcome Scodanibbio

(2011) successfully explained was the establishment of more sustainable behaviors that took the

form of a Water Use Planning program for BC Hydro’s facilities. The case study found that the

situational factors (e.g., political, economic, institutional) could be paired with organizational-

change processes (e.g., creating urgency, building a coalition, enabling actions) to establish a

need for change, make the change occur, and institute the change so that it is sustainable.

Specific examples included creating urgency due to reliance on a singular process for power

generation that was harming the environment, short-term wins through pilot projects,

establishing buy-in through a guiding coalition of interest groups, forming a strategic vision

through leaders, and institutionalizing the change.

The synthesis of path-dependent factors (e.g. cultural, political, economic, and

institutional characteristics) with steps of organizational change also produced a method that

aptly describes the successful municipal energy-generation transition from conventional to

renewable sources for the city of Aspen, Colorado. Additionally, the previously failed transition

in Fort Morgan lacked certain attributes of the synthesis (e.g., a guiding coalition, institutional

mechanisms, a strategic vision); and the ongoing project has begun to offer some of the

previously missing characteristics. Furthermore, the completion of this research, and sharing of

the findings, could contribute to the ongoing project in Fort Morgan to complete a successful

transition.


Therefore the research has determined that path-dependent factors (i.e., cultural, political,

economic, and institutional) influence a municipality’s adoption of renewable energy.

Specifically, the reinforcing dynamics of path-dependent theories can be synthesized with factors

of organizational-change theory to explain the pursuit and adoption of renewable energy. This

adoption holds true for municipalities with dissimilar attributes, because municipalities with

contrasting demographics (cultural, political, economic, and institutional) are ultimately affected

by the same organizational-change factors in the process of adopting renewable energy.

Limitations

The research proposal focused on two small communities located in Colorado with the

utilities being owned and operated by a public entity. These distinguishing factors reflect a very

specific environment and limit generalizability. However, some of the factors (e.g., cultural

demographics, political beliefs, economic environments, and institutional mechanisms) are

applicable to a wide variety of municipalities in the United States. Additionally, not all energy-

producing and -distribution utilities are publicly owned; however, the issues of incorporating

renewables would be similar for a private corporation. The current research also compares two

municipalities that, while having many dissimilarities, model more than one similar factor (e.g.,

both publicly owned and located in Colorado).

This study also did not consider quantitative measures of renewable energy for analysis,

but rather focused on qualitative measures in a case-study format. To further evaluate the

legitimacy of the claims, additional research should incorporate quantitative measures.

Accordingly, because of the comprehensive intent but limited nature of the research (including

time and resource constraints), a wide variety of factors were excluded from analysis (e.g.,

complex institutional measures such as rate structures) or were given very brief analysis (e.g.,


partisan values). Therefore, future research could incorporate expansively more factors and

extend the content to determine more specific correlations.

Future Work

Beyond the limitations already mentioned, the current proposal is but one piece of the

puzzle. Research and development that are focused on improving battery storage and

infrastructure for renewable energies are a large factor in the adoption of renewable energy. In

fact, 71% of Millennials believe that America’s energy-policy priorities “should focus on

developing alternative energy sources rather than expanding oil, coal and natural gas

exploration”, and 82% favor increasing federal funding for renewable technologies (“The

Generation Gap,” 2012). However, in the meantime, building renewable energy infrastructure

that is well-tested and proven to be productive, as well as updating coal-fired plants and

sustaining bridge fuels, should be maintained; transitioning to renewable energy will not be

possible without intermediary resources and time (Freeman, 2015, p. 334).

The ever increasing, and ever changing regulations from both a federal and state level

require continually updated research in terms of their effect on adoption. These policies are also

currently being viewed as unfunded mandates. Therefore, state and local governments will have

to be creative and innovative in getting these facilities funded. As adoption grows in

municipalities, research on experimental designs that are successful will also need to be

continually updated.

It is also important to realize that renewable resources are not the end-all solution to all

energy and climate problems. The public must make an effort to become more energy efficient,

as well as decrease the overall demand in order to be sustainable in the long run (Freeman, 2015,

p. 333). This shift is especially important because the “world energy demand is projected to


double by 2040 as the developing world industrializes” (U.S. Energy Info, 2013). It is more

responsible and fiscally conservative to invest in technology than it is to respond to disaster.

These dynamics require that the application of a synthesized comparative, organizational-

change approach must be continually updated. Additionally, to further the generalizability of the

conclusion, analysis of different institutions should be done. This extension can include not only

other municipalities in Colorado (with different demographic factors), but municipalities in other

states, as well as co-ops and other organizations that provide electricity. Further research could

expand into the private sector or develop to address other levels of government (i.e., state,

federal, international). Lastly, the issues of renewable-energy production cross the border

between the public and private sectors; therefore, the mechanism of this synthesized theory could

be applied to private business as well.


References

“About Us.” (n.d.) Retrieved from http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Living-in-the-Valley/Green-

Initiatives/Canary-Initiative/About-Us/

Adolino, J. R., & Blake, C. H. (2010). Comparing public policies: Issues and choices in

industrialized countries. Washington, DC: SAGE

Alló, M., & Loureiro, M. L. (2014). The role of social norms on preferences towards climate

change policies: A meta-analysis. Energy Policy, 73, 563-574.

American Public Power Association. (2015). 2015-2016 annual directory & statistical report.

Retrieved from

http://www.publicpower.org/files/PDFs/USElectricUtilityIndustryStatistics.pdf

Andrews, T. G. (2010). Killing for coal: America's deadliest labor war. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press.

Aspen City: Demographic and Economic Profile.” (2016, September). Retrieved from

https://demography.dola.colorado.gov/demography/publications-and-

presentations/#publications-and-presentations

Berry, M. J., Laird, F. N., & Stefes, C. H. (2015). Driving energy: the enactment and

ambitiousness of state renewable energy policy. Journal of Public Policy, 35(2), 297-328.

Best, A. (2013, August 22). Aspen’s troubled hydroelectric project. Retrieved from

http://mountaintownnews.net/2013/08/22/aspens-troubled-hydroelectric-project/

Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2015). Making sense of change management: a complete guide to the

models, tools and techniques of organizational change. London Great Britain: Kogan

Page Publishers.

“Canary Action Plan.” (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Living-in-the-

Valley/Green-Initiatives/Canary-Initiative/About-Us/

Carley, S., & Miller, C. J. (2012). Regulatory stringency and policy drivers: a reassessment of

renewable portfolio standards. Policy Studies Journal, 40(4), 730-756.

Carlsson, F., Kataria, M., Krupnick, A., Lampi, E., Löfgren, Å., Qin, P…& Sterner, T. (2012).

Paying for mitigation: a multiple country study. Land Economics, 88(2), 326-340.

Carnevale, D. G. (2003). Organizational development in the public sector. Boulder, CO:

Westview Press.

Citizens’ Climate Lobby. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://citizensclimatelobby.org/


Connolly, K. (2015, June 8). G7 leaders agree to phase out fossil fuel use by end of century.

Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/08/g7-leaders-agree-phase-

out-fossil-fuel-use-end-of-century

Climate change may be to blame for Great Barrier Reef’s coral bleaching: Warm temperatures

brought on by climate change and El Nino cause reef damage. (2016, March 23).

Retrieved from http://www.localsyr.com/news/climate-change-may-be-to-blame-for-

great-barrier-reefs-coral-bleaching

“Current Projects & Programs.” (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Living-in-

the-Valley/Green-Initiatives/Canary-Initiative/Current-Projects-Programs/

Davenport, C. (2016, March 31). Obama and President Xi of China Vow to Sign Paris Climate

Accord Promptly. The New York Times. Retrieved from

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/01/world/asia/obama-and-president-xi-of-china-vow-

to-sign-paris-climate-accord-promptly.html?_r=0

Dodge, J. (2015, May 18). CSU students support race relations work in Fort Morgan. Retrieved

from http://source.colostate.edu/csu-students-support-race-relations-work-in-fort-morgan/

Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.-a). Climate change: Basic information. Retrieved

February 21, 2016 from http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/

Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.-b). Agriculture and food supply. Retrieved March 23,

2016 from https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/impacts/agriculture.html

Environmental Protection Agency. (2015). Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and

sinks: 1990-2013 executive summary. Retrieved February 21, 2016 from

http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/pdfs/usinventoryreport/US-GHG-Inventory-2015-

Chapter-Executive-Summary.pdf

Fischlein, M., Smith, T. M., & Wilson, E. J. (2009). Carbon emissions and management

scenarios for consumer-owned utilities. environmental science & policy, 12(7), 778-790.

Freeman, J. (2015). A critical look at “The moral case for fossil fuels.” Energy Law Journal

36(2), 327-353.

Gawel, E., Strunz, S., & Lehmann, P. (2013). Germany's energy transition under attack: Is there

an inscrutable German sonderweg? Nature and Culture, 8(2), 121-133.

Hallegatte, S., & Corfee-Morlot, J. (2011). Understanding climate change impacts, vulnerability

and adaptation at city scale: an introduction. Climatic Change, 104(1), 1-12.

Huang, M. Y., Alavalapati, J. R., Carter, D. R., & Langholtz, M. H. (2007). Is the choice of

renewable portfolio standards random? Energy Policy, 35(11), 5571-5575.

http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Living-in-the-Valley/Green-Initiatives/Canary-Initiative/Current-Projects-Programs/

http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Living-in-the-Valley/Green-Initiatives/Canary-Initiative/Current-Projects-Programs/


International City County Management Association. (2016, March 21). Nearly a third of local

government have adopted sustainability plans. Retrieved from

http://icma.org/en/icma/newsroom/highlights/Article/106899/Nearly_a_Third_of_Local_

Governments_Have_Adopted_Sustainability_Plans

International Energy Agency. (2015, October 2). Renewables to lead world power market growth

to 2020. Retrieved from

http://www.iea.org/newsroomandevents/pressreleases/2015/october/renewables-to-lead-

world-power-market-growth-to-2020.html

Koop, G., & Tole, L. (1999). Is there an environmental Kuznets curve for deforestation? Journal

of Development economics, 58(1), 231-244.

Kotter, J. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.kotterinternational.com/about-us/who-we-are/john-

kotter/

Kotter, J. P., & Cohen, D. S. (2012). The heart of change: Real-life stories of how people change

their organizations. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.

Kaminsky, J. A. (2016). Cultured construction: Global evidence of the impact of national values

on renewable electricity infrastructure choice. Environmental Science & Technology, 50,

2108−2116.

Kiley, J. (2015, June 16). Ideological divide over global warming as wide as ever. PewResearch

Center. Retrieved May 31, 2016 from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-

tank/2015/06/16/ideological-divide-over-global-warming-as-wide-as-ever/

Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston, MA: Little Brown.

Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. (Rev. ed.). New York, NY:

Pearson.

Krauss, C. (2012, November 8). Renewable energy gains some steam. The New York Times.

Retrieved March 3, 2016 from

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B01E4DF1430F93BA35752C1A9649D

8B63

Laird, F. N., & Stefes, C. (2009). The diverging paths of German and United States policies for

renewable energy: Sources of difference. Energy Policy, 37(7), 2619-2629.

Lober, D. J. (1997). Explaining the formation of business-environmentalist collaborations:

Collaborative windows and the Paper Task Force. Policy Sciences, 30(1), 1-24.

Maclay, K. (2015, October 21). Study finds climate change will reshape global economy.

Retrieved March 3, 2015 from http://news.berkeley.edu/2015/10/21/study-finds-climate-

change-will-reshape-global-economy/


McGrath, M. (2016, February 10). Obama climate initiative: Supreme Court calls halt. BBC

News. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-35538350

Meyer, Robinson. (2016, March 23). The struggle of clear climate communication: Why it’s so

difficult to talk about the new bombshell climate paper. The Atlantic. Retrieved from

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/03/the-struggle-of-clear-climate-

communication/474987/

“Morgan County: Demographic and Economic Profile.” (2016, June). Retrieved from

https://demography.dola.colorado.gov/demography/publications-and-

presentations/#publications-and-presentations

National Climate Assessment (2014). Sea level rise. Retrieved January 9, 2016 from

http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/our-changing-climate/sea-level-rise

“Pitkin County: At a Glance.” (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.pitkincounty.com/DocumentCenter/View/2790

“Pitkin County Elections.” (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.pitkinvotes.org/home/historical-

election-data

Rahman, M. , Paatero, J., Poudyal, A., & Lahdelma, R. (2013). Driving and hindering factors for

rural electrification in developing countries: Lessons from Bangladesh. Energy Policy,

61, 840-851.

Richardson, V. (2016, August 29). White House defends Obama evading Senate on Paris climate

deal. The Washington Times. Retrieved from

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/29/obama-will-bypass-senate-ratify-

paris-climate-acco/

Robbie, E. (2015, September 1). Aspen is thirs U.S. city to reach 100% renewable energy.

Retrieved from http://www.aspentimes.com/news/17972193-113/aspen-is-third-us-city-

to-reach-100

Schneider, C., & Banks J. (2010). The toll from coal: An updated assessment of death and

disease from america’s dirtiest energy source. Clean Air Task Force, September.

Retrieved from http://www.catf.us/resources/publications/files/The_Toll_from_Coal.pdf

Scodanibbio, L. (2011). Opening a policy window for organisational change and full-cost

accounting: The creation of BC Hydro's water use planning program. Ecological

Economics, 70(5), 1006-1015.

Shulman, S. (2013, August 8). Got science? A ‘green tea party’ may be brewing. Retrieved from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-shulman/got-science-a-green-tea-p_b_3726459.html

Sovacool, B. K., & Dworkin, M. H. (2014). Global energy justice: Problems, principles, and

practices. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.


“Sustainability Report.” (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Living-in-the-

Valley/Sustainability-Report/

Sutter, J.D., Berlinger, J., & Ellis, R.. (2015, December 14). Obama: Climate agreement 'best

chance we have' to save the planet. CNN. Retrieved from

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/12/world/global-climate-change-conference-vote/

Thompson, C. (2016, April 18). Doctors issue call to combat climate change. United Press

International. Retrieved from http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2016/04/18/Doctors-

issue-call-to-combat-climate-change/2121461014290/

“‘Today is an historic day,’ says Ban, as 175 countries sign Paris climate accord. (2016, April

22). United Nations News Centre. Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=53756#.V-GAffkrKUl

“Top Ten Goals.” (n.d.). Retrieved from

http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/CommRelations/City%20Council%20T

op%20Ten%20Goals%2015_16.pdf

Wiener, J. G., & Koontz, T. M. (2010). Shifting winds: explaining variation in state policies to

promote small-scale wind energy. Policy Studies Journal, 38(4), 629-651.

Wiser, R. H. (2007). Using contingent valuation to explore willingness to pay for renewable

energy: a comparison of collective and voluntary payment vehicles. Ecological

Economics, 62(3), 419-432.

Documents

Chelsea Gondeck - Final Thesis