۱- Introduction

۲- Literature

۳- Theoretical framework

۴- Research method

۵- Background

۶- Case study

۷- Discussion

۸- Conclusions

References

Abstract

This paper examines capital budgeting and its role in the ‘energy trilemma’. The key focus is on the role of knowledgeable agency in the analysis of strategic conduct. In particular, this study demonstrates how accounting tools can be used by executive managers, who, whilst dominant in their own organisations, are themselves subordinate to government in the United Kingdom and at the European level. The strategic conduct of actors is examined in a narrative, theorised case study setting spanning an 11-year period from 2006 to 2017. The principal contribution to knowledge from this study is the extent to which strategic investment accounting has played a role in changing regulatory and government policy in a privatised industry. Government and regulators were forced to take the generators’ concerns seriously, because the generators (based on knowledge derived from capital budgets) restricted their capital expenditure rather than mobilising their resources. The generators highlighted that not only was this a problem of environmental sustainability and price for consumers, but also one of long-term supply. They argued that the government had to address all aspects of the trilemma when creating policy.

Introduction

Encouraging the right type of investment is essential to the success of any energy policy. Suitable investments would maintain low prices, achieve reductions in emissions, and keep the lights on (Warren, 2014). The World Energy Council has identified supply, pricing, and emissions as the three major global energy concerns, termed within the industry as ‘the energy trilemma’. However, establishing a suitable energy policy is subject to complex regulatory systems, which both impose controls on prices to consumers and set out environmental targets for companies. This can be specific to a particular country. In the energy industry, any type of change requires complicated discussions and debates with regulators, politicians and generators. Although the relative dominance of each group of actors varies across the world, each country faces a similar problem: how to balance the energy trilemma. The energy trilemma is recognised as an urgent problem in Great Britain (GB),1 the geographical setting for this case study. It is urgent because energy prices for consumers rose during the main data collection period for the case study, 2006–۲۰۱۴ (DECC, 2014a2 ), while security of supply is an unresolved issue (OFGEM, 2012, 3 Johnson, 2014, Grigorjeva, 2015, Yiakoumi & Rouaix, 2016, DBEIS, 2017 4 ). In 2011, the industry regulators acknowledged that the country’s market energy structure was no longer fit for purpose (DECC, 2011), highlighting the distinct lack of significant new investment. According to DECC (2014b) the requirement for reduced emissions is the only component of the energy trilemma that is currently being achieved. This has led to public outrage, and questions over why such a crucial commodity such as electricity is apparently being irresponsibly managed (Inman, 2014; Morison, 2014). Appreciation of the significance of lack of investment is central to understanding the energy trilemma. As Falkner (2014, p. 188) argues, “energy is central to the survival and prosperity of human society”.